Re: Fonts not found issue persists in 3.0.5

[email protected] Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:44:45 +0200
Newsgroups	gmane.comp.web.dillo.devel
Message-ID	<20150712064445.GA17278@g0n>
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 05:29:20PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:19:11PM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> > See this issue below?
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 09:29:18AM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> > > I got the new Dillo version 3.0.5 (in the master air-gapped box, which I
> > > yet have to clone onto this, for online, same hardware box), as it is
> > > available in gentoo:
> > > 
> > > https://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-client/dillo/
> > > 
> > > but my problem with fonts (the FAQ issue
> > > http://www.dillo.org/FAQ.html#q27), to which eocene has kindly given the
> > > tip for in his message:
> > > 
> > > http://lists.dillo.org/pipermail/dillo-dev/2015-April/010500.html
> > > 
> > 
> > And we thought:
> > > For people reading this message offline, I'll paste his advice, since it is
> > > also important:
> > > 
> > > If you go to dw/fltkplatform.cc and, in FltkFont::initSystemFonts(),
> > > remove the leading underscore in
> > >    _MSG("Found font: %s%s%s\n", name, t & FL_BOLD ? " bold" : "",
> > > to get
> > >    MSG("Found font: %s%s%s\n", name, t & FL_BOLD ? " bold" : "",
> > > and recompile, what does dillo say when you run it?
> > >
> > 
> > But we were wrong! And it was only something an unimaginative person
> > like me can be capable of not figuring out despite urgent need and
> > sincere desire because of that urgent need (my eyes have been hurting
> > from the fixed not-much-more-than ASCII font that was all I've seen in,
> > what?, a few months?
> > 
> > We were wrong! It only needed that the fltk be recompiled with, guess
> > what?, with the the XFT font renederer!
> > 
> > That was the sole missing thing.
> 
>   I'm glad you finally nailed the issue, and have proper fonts.
> 
> 
> > But I think I am going to file a bug on Gentoo Bugzilla about this!
> > (But if anybody can tell a reason that justifies the xft use flag not
> > being the default, pls. do tell me... in which case my filing the bug
> > would not make sense; I don't see such reason though.)
> 
>   I neither see a reason for this...
> 
> -- 
>   Cheers
>   Jorge.-

Thanx, boss!

I think I found what was missing in the Gentoo ebuild, and I may have
reported correctly on the Bugzilla:

Dillo ebuild is missing xft flag for fltk, causes eye-sore
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=554588

I tried to give credit where it was due, and you can find Walter Dnes
name in the bug report above ;-) .

Because this triggered my understanding,[...]
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 10:34:24AM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
...
> > You also have to have x11-libs/fltk on
> > your system.  For fltk, the "xft" USE flag is strongly recommended.  I
> > wonder if the "opengl" and "threads" USE flags would help fltk+dillo.
[...]and the snippet of the dawning conversation can be found on:

http://lists.dillo.org/pipermail/dillo-dev/2015-July/010594.html

Cheers!

On another note, still wrecking my nerves: it's a real torture accessing
and posting bugs.gentoo.org with my current setup or with the something
missing in dillo. It sure will take me time to really figure and deploy
on my Gentoo the ebuilds in my local overlay with the current mercurial
code (slowly making progress there too), so only then I'll know if the
issue has been fixed in it...

Just, in case anyone could see any reasons for the thousands per minute
cookies.dpi lines as described in my Grsecurity Forums Dillo topic:

Deploy RBAC on Dillo browser
https://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4228

where my current policy for Dillo is at:
https://forums.grsecurity.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4228#p15372

Cheers!
-- 
Miroslav Rovis
Zagreb, Croatia
http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

_______________________________________________
Dillo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dillo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 819 B)