Re: Format of -dshow-available-fonts output

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno mar 24 lug 2018 alle 21:37, Urs Liska <address@hidden> 
ha scritto:
> Am 24.07.2018 um 20:48 schrieb David Wright:
> > On Tue 24 Jul 2018 at 18:50:27 (+0200), Urs Liska wrote:
> >
> > > Is it possible that the problem is due to an old fontconfig version
> > > used by LilyPond? my Debian package is 2.13.0, the LilyPond
> > > directory suggests a version 1.9.2 (is that possible?).
> > Can you be a bit more specific about what versioning you mean.
> > Here (Debian stretch):
> >
> >   david 270584 Jun 24 07:12 
> > /home/david/lilypond-2.19.82-1/lilypond/usr/lib/libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
> >   root  252968 Aug 24  2016 
> > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfontconfig.so.1.8.0
> >
> > ii fontconfig 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font configuration library 
> > - support binaries
> > ii libfontconfig1:amd64 2.11.0-6.7+b1 amd64 generic font 
> > configuration library - runtime
> >
> > It seems as if you're comparing package versions with library 
> > versions.
>
> Indeed, I don't really know what I'm talking about.
> On my system I have installed
>
> $ apt show fontconfig
> Package: fontconfig
> Version: 2.13.0-5
>
> which includes a libfontconfig1 package of that same version.
>
> In my system directories I have:
>
> $ ls -l /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ | grep fontconfig
> -rw-r--r--  1 root root   492422 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.a
> lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root       23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so -> 
> libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
> lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root       23 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1 -> 
> libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
> -rw-r--r--  1 root root   273368 Mai 14 10:32 libfontconfig.so.1.11.1
>
> and within the LilyPond installation (like you)
>
> $ ls -l ~/software/lilypond/releases/2.19.82/usr/lib/ | grep 
> fontconfig
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 uliska uliska    1086 Jun 24 14:10 libfontconfig.la
> lrwxrwxrwx  1 uliska uliska      22 Mai 20  2017 libfontconfig.so -> 
> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
> lrwxrwxrwx  1 uliska uliska      22 Mai 20  2017 libfontconfig.so.1 
> -> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 uliska uliska  270584 Jun 24 14:12 
> libfontconfig.so.1.9.2
>
> Am I right to think that LilyPond uses the bundled library (1.9.2?) 
> while fc-list uses 1.11.1?
> If so, would that be an explanation for the differences in the 
> reported font names? Or could it be related to some code in LilyPond, 
> how that *uses* fontconfig?

As David wrote, you are still comparing library versions with 
fontconfig versions.
I think you should check what `fc-list --version` shows for each 
installation. I don't think that library versioning matters.

As an example, see the difference between the lilypond.org 2.18.2 
packaged installed in /opt and my Fedora 2.19.82 package:

[~]$ ls /opt/lilypond/usr/lib/ | grep fontconfig
libfontconfig.la
libfontconfig.so
libfontconfig.so.1
libfontconfig.so.1.4.4

[~]$ ls /usr/lib64/ | grep fontconfig
libfontconfig.so
libfontconfig.so.1
libfontconfig.so.1.11.1



[~]$ /opt/lilypond/usr/bin/fc-list --version
fontconfig version 2.8.0

[~]$ fc-list --version
fontconfig version 2.13.0