Re: Pango on windows

From: Joaquin Cuenca Abela (cuenca@pacaterie.u-psud.fr)
Date: Mon Apr 29 2002 - 13:24:53 EDT

  • Next message: Kenneth J.Davis: "Re: I vote to abort 1.0.0 and announce 1.0.1"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Tomas Frydrych" <tomas@frydrych.uklinux.net>
    To: "Joaquin Cuenca Abela" <cuenca@pacaterie.u-psud.fr>
    Cc: <abiword-dev@abisource.com>
    Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 1:50 PM
    Subject: Re: Pango on windows

    >
    > Hi Joaquin,
    >
    > > I've been playing a bit with pango, using the windows native backend.
    > >
    > > First, make the whole thing compile and run was a pain. Maybe it's
    > > just me been a unix guy, but it took me several hours to get the whole
    > > thing running (and I was using precompiled packages for glib...)
    >
    > If it is any consolation, I did not suceed at all.
    >
    > > The windows native backend seems to be in a more or less functional
    > > state.
    >
    > The FT2 backend should be in a better condition, since it is used in
    > GIMP and GnomeCanvas (so Owen tells me); I suspect the win32
    > backend is not used in anything.
    >
    > > The only big problem that I've seen is that the size of the
    > > fonts was (*absolutely*) wrong. If you ask for a font size of 12,
    > > pango renders the font with a size of ~7.5 points.
    > >
    > > I've patched pango to fix this problem, so if you want to play with
    > > the windows backend apply the attached patch before you start the fun.
    >
    > I am do not think the patch is correct either, according to the docs,
    > font sizes are meant to be given in 1/64th' of a point,

    Nope. I guess that you're speaking about PangoGlyphUnit, but sizes are
    specified in logical points (typographical points).

    > so the
    > resolution should be something like:
    >
    > PANGO_SCALE * 72 / (64 * device_dpi)

    I would have seen an error in a factor of 64 in the output strings... :-)

    Cheers,



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 29 2002 - 13:23:00 EDT