Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 12:21:47 -0400 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: gnome@freebsd.org, bsam@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Rationale for the linux-fontconfig change in the gnome 2.18 update? Message-ID: <1174839707.68048.14.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <20070321193149.58843a02@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <20070321193149.58843a02@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-shFAKLyNskUM90mRCNJC Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 19:31 +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Hi Gnome team, >=20 > I would like to know the rationale for the install of a custom > fonts.conf instead of linking to the FreeBSD one as before. >=20 > Are the config files incompatible and if yes which version of > fontconfig do we need at least to be compatible? I would prefer to > update the fontconfig somehow instead of installing a custom fonts.conf > file. They are very different in 2.4. There is no longer one config file. Instead, they are loaded like rc.d scripts in an ordered fashion from etc/fonts/conf.d. That said, I see no reason why the linux-fontconfig port could not be updated to 2.4.2 as well. Joe --=20 PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc --=-shFAKLyNskUM90mRCNJC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBGBqGbb2iPiv4Uz4cRArhgAKCJMLVqecmfcrRRTWRaW8Xs0RwQQQCgkQTb QO2lfZpE6uWfhu50YeRDKTU= =c8ba -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-shFAKLyNskUM90mRCNJC--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1174839707.68048.14.camel>