Fwd: Should we expect Liberation fonts to be installed?

André Hentschel nerv at dawncrow.de
Thu Aug 12 06:34:21 CDT 2010

Am 12.08.2010 06:11, schrieb Paul "TBBle" Hampson:
> Sorry, I failed at Gmail again. >_<
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Paul "TBBle" Hampson <Paul.Hampson at pobox.com>
> Date: 12 August 2010 13:52
> Subject: Re: Should we expect Liberation fonts to be installed?
> To: Scott Ritchie <scott at open-vote.org>
> On 8 August 2010 13:02, Scott Ritchie <scott at open-vote.org> wrote:
>> On 08/03/2010 01:57 PM, Scott Ritchie wrote:
>>> I was looking through our fairly large collection of open font bugs and
>>> realized that things might be a lot simpler if we took some opinionated
>>> positions and just declared certain fonts to be dependencies and
>>> expected all packagers to provide them.
>>> This is similar to bundling our own Tahoma, except much less work.
>>> This bug, for instance, prevents Photoshop from working unless there is
>>> an Arial font installed: http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9623
>>> Wine doesn't seem to respect system-level fontconfig aliases, so even
>>> though Liberation Sans is installed on the system Photoshop won't try to
>>> use it in place of Arial.
>>> But if however we assumed that Liberation Sans was installed, we could
>>> make things much better: a link/substitution for Arial->Liberation Sans
>>> could be provided in our own registry (and similarly for Times New Roman
>>> and Courier).  An alternative is to simply symlink to the Liberation
>>> Fonts in /usr/share/wine/fonts as though they were our own shipped fonts
>>> (like Tahoma).
>>> This would make Photoshop think Arial was present and keep it
>>> functional.  Ideally the real Arial would be displayed if it was
>>> installed (eg through winetricks corefonts or by installing the
>>> distro-provided corefonts package).
>>> A related question is whether to show "Arial" in the list of fonts (eg
>>> notepad) when we're actually just providing a substituted Arial.  My
>>> inclination says no, however I'm not sure how it works internally and
>>> what an application would expect.
>> Assuming for a moment this is a good idea, what's the best
>> implementation?  My inclination is to say some registry font links, but
>> I'm not completely familiar with how that works.
>> Will font links in the registry be ignored when the real font is present?
> (Wine-specific) Font Replacements will be ignored when the real font
> is present. Those're the ones in HKCU\Software\Wine\Fonts\Replacements
> and probably the ones you want to use. (Which could be supplanted or
> supplemented by working FontConfig alias support...)
> (GDI) Font Links (ie. the same registry entries Windows uses) are
> fallbacks for missing glyphs. Those're the ones in
> HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\FontLink\SystemLink
> Font Substitutes _probably_ don't get ignored if a real font with that
> name exists. Those're the ones in HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows
> NT\CurrentVersion\FontSubstitutes and they're pretty purpose-specific.
> The only entries we want for them in Wine are the ones described at
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/michkap/archive/2005/03/20/399322.aspx (which
> should probably be the default in Wine anyway, at least the Tahoma
> entry.)

Wow, can you please update http://wiki.winehq.org/FontLoadOrder with these great informations?


Best Regards, André Hentschel

More information about the wine-devel mailing list