11:07 p.m.
Hi All,
In Scientific Linux 6, Terminal mashes certain letters together.
On investigation, I found that Terminal's RPM had no dependencies.
I reported this as a bug to Xfce, but they declined it as it is an RPM
problem and not theirs.
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7706
Over on the bug, I added a graphic to show the overlap problem:
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/attachment.cgi?id=3726
And, if you install nautilus-open-terminal, one of its
dependencies solves the Terminal overlap problem.
I have documented nautilus-open-terminal's dependencies
over on the bug report as well.
Would whoever maintains the SL 6 RPM for Terminal
please take a look over at the dug and add the proper
dependencies into the RPM?
Many thanks,
-T
11:42 p.m.
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 22:07, Todd And Margo Chester
<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,
In Scientific Linux 6, Terminal mashes certain letters together.
On investigation, I found that Terminal's RPM had no dependencies.
Ok Scientific Linux has different upstream repositories that people
can point to. You need to find out which repostitory you got that RPM
from because each one could do it differently. The EPEL package of
Terminal shows the following:
[ssmoogen@ponyo ~]$ rpm -q --requires Terminal
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
/bin/sh
control-center-filesystem
libX11.so.6()(64bit)
libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libdbus-1.so.3()(64bit)
libdbus-glib-1.so.2()(64bit)
libexo-1.so.0()(64bit)
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libvte.so.9()(64bit)
libxfce4util.so.4()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
I reported this as a bug to Xfce, but they declined it as it is an
RPM
problem and not theirs.
Well the issue may be more with the fonts you are using. Looking at
what the dependencies that nautilus brings in I see the following:
config(nautilus-open-terminal) = 0.17-3.el6
libcairo.so.2()(64bit)
libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
libgconf-2.so.4()(64bit)
libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
libgnome-desktop-2.so.11()(64bit)
libnautilus-extension.so.1()(64bit)
libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
libstartup-notification-1.so.0()(64bit)
[not counting the ton of other stuff.] My first guess will be
libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
and the font you are using is is giving "hints" but without the proper
type packages it can't read the hints so you end up with overlaps.
I will need to see about installing a box without nautilus to see if I
can replicate the issue and figure out what might be needed to pull in
extra font support.
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7706
Over on the bug, I added a graphic to show the overlap problem:
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/attachment.cgi?id=3726
And, if you install nautilus-open-terminal, one of its
dependencies solves the Terminal overlap problem.
I have documented nautilus-open-terminal's dependencies
over on the bug report as well.
Would whoever maintains the SL 6 RPM for Terminal
please take a look over at the dug and add the proper
dependencies into the RPM?
Many thanks,
-T
_______________________________________________
xfce mailing list
xfce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren
8:56 a.m.
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:54:50 -0700
Todd And Margo Chester <toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...snip...
I probably did not enable the epel testing repo when I asked
for dependencies.
Any way to add the
libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
into Terminal's dependencies?
Thats quite odd.
Please do file a bug on it?
kevin
3:57 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 07:56, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:54:50 -0700
Todd And Margo Chester <toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...snip...
> I probably did not enable the epel testing repo when I asked
> for dependencies.
>
> Any way to add the
>
> libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
> libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
> libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
>
> into Terminal's dependencies?
Thats quite odd.
Please do file a bug on it?
I am still trying to duplicate the issue. Those items should be pulled
in by VTE so I am not sure I was pointing in the right location. If I
can duplicate I will figure out what the 'missing' dep is.
kevin
_______________________________________________
xfce mailing list
xfce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren
5:15 p.m.
On 06/28/2011 06:56 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:54:50 -0700
Todd And Margo Chester<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
...snip...
> I probably did not enable the epel testing repo when I asked
> for dependencies.
>
> Any way to add the
>
> libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
> libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
> libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
>
> into Terminal's dependencies?
Thats quite odd.
Please do file a bug on it?
kevin
I Did.
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7706
It was closed as "invalid": Report back if the problem is
related to terminal itself.
-T
10:15 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 16:15, Todd And Margo Chester
<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 06/28/2011 06:56 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:54:50 -0700
> Todd And Margo Chester<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...snip...
>
>> I probably did not enable the epel testing repo when I asked
>> for dependencies.
>>
>> Any way to add the
>>
>> libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
>> libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
>> libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
>>
>> into Terminal's dependencies?
> Thats quite odd.
>
> Please do file a bug on it?
>
> kevin
>
I Did.
https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7706
It was closed as "invalid": Report back if the problem is
related to terminal itself.
In this case, it would be the wrong bugzilla and needs to be
bugzilla.redhat.com because the issue is with the EPEL package. I have
installed a system myself and am unable to replicate the font problem
yet. What program did you use to show it the first time?
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren
10:34 p.m.
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 21:15, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 16:15, Todd And Margo Chester
<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/28/2011 06:56 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:54:50 -0700
>> Todd And Margo Chester<toddandmargo(a)gmail.com> wrote:
In this case, it would be the wrong bugzilla and needs to be
bugzilla.redhat.com because the issue is with the EPEL package. I have
installed a system myself and am unable to replicate the font problem
yet. What program did you use to show it the first time?
How I tried to replicate:
1) In KVM do a minimal install of Scientific Linux
2) yum groupinstall "X Window System"
3) yum install xorg-x11-xinit* xorg-x11-fonts* xorg-x11-twm xorg-x11-app* xterm
4) startx and see if I get a twm desktop. Check basic fonts
5) yum groupinstall "Xfce"
6) startx and see how fonts look.
7) looked at what packages were pulled in by a 'yum install
nautilus-open-terminal'
exempi
gnome-disk-utility-libs
gvfs
libatasmart
libcdio
mtools
nautilus
nautilus-extensions
sg3_utils-libs
smp_utils
udisks
unique
None of those affect fonts so.. I am not sure how this fixed it for
you.. I am going with "font fairies" at the moment. My earlier
proposition about needing more packages was wrong because doing a yum
groupinstall Xfce would pull them in already.
So at the moment I am not sure what could have changed things... it
did, but like I said fairies are as good an explanation as things at
the moment.
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Let us be kind, one to another, for most of us are fighting a hard
battle." -- Ian MacLaren
11:03 p.m.
On 06/28/2011 08:15 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
In this case, it would be the wrong bugzilla and needs to be
bugzilla.redhat.com because the issue is with the EPEL package. I have
installed a system myself and am unable to replicate the font problem
yet. What program did you use to show it the first time?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718121
4682
days inactive
4686
days old
8 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Kevin Fenzi -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Todd And Margo Chester