[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: font use
From: |
Patrick Karl |
Subject: |
Re: font use |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:31:18 -0500 |
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 17:09:10 +0100
> From: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
> To: "Fr. Michael Gilmary, mma" <address@hidden>,
> <address@hidden>, "James Lowe" <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: font use
>
> There have been a few reports of problems with fonts on Macs. These seem all
> to be related to a GhostScript upgrade - I think an upgrade to 8.70? Perhaps
> you're seeing a similar problem?
That font problem on Macs occurred when the OS was upgraded to OSX 10.6.7. It
appears to be a problem in ATS, the Apple Type Server. The OP reports that he
is using OSX 10.4.11, so I think it's unlikely that he has been affected by
this problem.
A lot of potential solutions to the Mac font problem have been proposed,
including:
* downgrading to OSX 10.6.6
* download a program called Onyx and using it to address the problem somehow
* clearing the font caches and restarting
I tried several of these solutions and didn't find that they solved the whole
problem. The best I did was to have everything look ok except for the notehead
in a MM metronome marking.
A user has developed what looks like a good fix for the problem in OSX 10.6.7,
namely to replace the new ATS modules with the old, 10.6.6 modules. I have
installed this fix on my MacPro, and find so far that it is effective and it
doesn't seem to have any undesirable side effects.
A pointer to the file in question is given here:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2792142?threadID=2792142&start=304&tstart=0
(you'll apparently be allowed into this secure site as a guest). The file is:
http://azlist.info/kj/support/fontfix10.6.7.zip.
Pat Karl
>
> --
> Phil Holmes
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Fr. Michael Gilmary, mma
> To: address@hidden ; James Lowe
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:48 PM
> Subject: Re: font use
>
> On Apr 26 AD 2011, at 2:21 AM, James Lowe wrote:
>
> I'm sure that those who know better will give you more detail but over the
> last 6 months there have been similar type questions about ligatures, looking
> back over these threads they are always led back to this thread
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-11/msg00128.html
>
> Thanks, James.
>
> Yes, I saw that thread and it's certainly related to what I'm looking for
> ... but the font I've been using almost exclusively for the last several
> years has all the glyphs and tables needed. In fact, I've been using XeLaTeX
> with Lilypond successfully for all that time (since about 2008). Only since
> I've obtained 2.13 did I notice the change in font handling --- both a change
> in ligature use and optical size selection. I'm also on the same OS since I
> began using Lilypond and friends (Mac OS 10.4.11).
>
> While the source code has not changed from 3 years ago (in the example I
> sent last time) the results definitely have changed. Even if I don't specify
> the font, the default font used by Lilypond no longer renders the ligatures
> either --- although that used to work, too.
>
> I've tried to go back to v. 2.12 and the problem is still there. I can't
> get v. 2.11 to work since it complains about something in lilypond-book and
> returns a "Child 11" or something like that ....
>
> So, IF the engine now needs some explicit call to use ligatures as before,
> does anyone know what that is?
>
> fr. michael gilmary, mma
- font use, Fr. Michael Gilmary, mma, 2011/04/25
- Re: font use,
Patrick Karl <=