GNU bug report logs -
#30435
libreoffice: Fonts don't show up after install
Previous Next
Reported by: hmk <hmk42 <at> posteo.de>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:30:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Done: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 30435 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 30435 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:30:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
hmk <hmk42 <at> posteo.de>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
.
(Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:30:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Package: guix
After installing and running libreoffice with
$ guix package -i libreoffice <at> 5.3.7.2
$ soffice
no fonts show up (see attached screenshot).
Following the instructions provided by
https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/html_node/Application-Setup.html#Application-Setup
I did
$ guix package -i fontconfig font-gnu-freefont-ttf
$ fc-cache -f
and this solves the issue.
Is this a missing dependency? Even though instructions to fix this
problem are given, from an end-user's perspective it would be nicer
perhaps to
have it automated?
(It's the first time I am posting to debbugs.gnu.org -- apologies if
something is not done in the proper way or form.)
[soffice-no-fonts.png (image/png, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 09:10:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
I can reproduce this on guix ce226e9d8d52d2530f057f2000d36c0d55380ade.
But libreoffice is not the only victim: it seems that most applications
fail to see the fonts installed in the user profile (on Guix System).
Emacs is one example.
Running
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
fc-cache -fv
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
fixes the issue.
Should we run this command in a profile hook?
--
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 09:20:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz> writes:
Hi, I wanted to add that the opposite is also true: removing a font
without running fc-cache always makes my emacs die on start, so I agree
that running the command automatically makes sense.
Are there any unwanted side-effects?
Thanks, Nicolò
> I can reproduce this on guix ce226e9d8d52d2530f057f2000d36c0d55380ade.
>
> But libreoffice is not the only victim: it seems that most applications
> fail to see the fonts installed in the user profile (on Guix System).
> Emacs is one example.
>
> Running
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> fc-cache -fv
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> fixes the issue.
>
> Should we run this command in a profile hook?
>
> --
> Pierre Neidhardt
> https://ambrevar.xyz/
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 09:38:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi there,
I think this is the same issue as 26877.
Can font information be compiled into a fonts.conf?
- John
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 15:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #17 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz> skribis:
> Running
>
> fc-cache -fv
>
> fixes the issue.
>
> Should we run this command in a profile hook?
Profile hooks are normal derivations; as such, they don’t have access to
anything but their dependencies and their output(s).
There’s currently no infrastructure to run arbitrary code upon package
installation (which I think is a feature more than a bug :-)). We could
make an exception, but it’s kinda ugly.
I wonder if, instead, we could have Fontconfig realize that the cache is
stale somehow.
Alternately, we could generate the cache in a profile hook and have
Fontconfig use that cache instead of the one in ~/.cache. However,
Fontconfig would need to be able to:
1. Be told which cache to use, not just the one from ~/.guix-profile,
so that it works equally well with other profiles.
2. Merge several caches, so it can also account for fonts installed in
/run/current-system/profile.
We discussed all this several times in the past but I don’t think it
went further.
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 15:48:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #20 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Nicolò,
Nicolò Balzarotti <anothersms <at> gmail.com> skribis:
> Hi, I wanted to add that the opposite is also true: removing a font
> without running fc-cache always makes my emacs die on start, so I agree
> that running the command automatically makes sense.
Actually, if you can capture a stack trace of Emacs, that may tell us
what part of Fontconfig to look at if we want to change it to gracefully
handle stale cache entries.
Ludo’.
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:00:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #23 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
OK, thanks for the details.
So the solution is the same as the one we discussed
previously about installing fonts to the non-default profile.
Makes sense.
I might give it a shot when I find the time ;)
--
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 20 Feb 2023 16:06:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #26 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Ludovic,
Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Pierre Neidhardt <mail <at> ambrevar.xyz> skribis:
>
>> Running
>>
>> fc-cache -fv
>>
>> fixes the issue.
>>
>> Should we run this command in a profile hook?
>
> Profile hooks are normal derivations; as such, they don’t have access to
> anything but their dependencies and their output(s).
>
> There’s currently no infrastructure to run arbitrary code upon package
> installation (which I think is a feature more than a bug :-)). We could
> make an exception, but it’s kinda ugly.
>
> I wonder if, instead, we could have Fontconfig realize that the cache is
> stale somehow.
>
> Alternately, we could generate the cache in a profile hook and have
> Fontconfig use that cache instead of the one in ~/.cache. However,
> Fontconfig would need to be able to:
>
> 1. Be told which cache to use, not just the one from ~/.guix-profile,
> so that it works equally well with other profiles.
That's possible since adding support to XDG_DATA_DIRS in fontconfig
itself (see c738a054cac00441a4f697f0b40705d0b3f4a7a7, "gnu: fontconfig:
Add a search path for XDG_DATA_DIRS.").
> 2. Merge several caches, so it can also account for fonts installed in
> /run/current-system/profile.
There was also something contributed that should have improved/fix cache
invalidity in 6f12880a76a6c91058718d15845f8b9d9b529a5a ("gnu:
fontconfig: Use (locally) deterministic caching").
I haven't seen this problem in a long while, so I'm inclined to think
it's been resolved.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 20 Feb 2023 17:34:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #29 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:06 AM Maxim Cournoyer
<maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't seen this problem in a long while, so I'm inclined to think
> it's been resolved.
I think I had that issue with a fresh install within the last year and
based on advice in IRC (thanks nckx!) ran 'fc-cache -fv'.
For what it's worth, I believe Debian's packaging tools (in this case,
Debhelper) detect changes to the font directories and add a font
update hook to the package installation scripts. Since we do not have
such scripts—and I am with Ludo' that it's probably a feature worth
preserving—maybe our package manager could run the hook?
Kind regards
Felix Lechner
Information forwarded
to
bug-guix <at> gnu.org
:
bug#30435
; Package
guix
.
(Mon, 20 Feb 2023 18:23:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #32 received at 30435 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Felix,
Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:06 AM Maxim Cournoyer
> <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I haven't seen this problem in a long while, so I'm inclined to think
>> it's been resolved.
>
> I think I had that issue with a fresh install within the last year and
> based on advice in IRC (thanks nckx!) ran 'fc-cache -fv'.
OK, thanks for the information; let's leave this bug open then.
> For what it's worth, I believe Debian's packaging tools (in this case,
> Debhelper) detect changes to the font directories and add a font
> update hook to the package installation scripts. Since we do not have
> such scripts—and I am with Ludo' that it's probably a feature worth
> preserving—maybe our package manager could run the hook?
Another idea: modify fontconfig so that it never creates or uses cache.
Revisit later if it causes performance problems (I doubt it would).
--
Thanks,
Maxim
Reply sent
to
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:30:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
hmk <hmk42 <at> posteo.de>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:30:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #37 received at 30435-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hello,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Felix,
>
> Felix Lechner <felix.lechner <at> lease-up.com> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 8:06 AM Maxim Cournoyer
>> <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I haven't seen this problem in a long while, so I'm inclined to think
>>> it's been resolved.
>>
>> I think I had that issue with a fresh install within the last year and
>> based on advice in IRC (thanks nckx!) ran 'fc-cache -fv'.
On a second thought, let's close this issue and reopen a new one if it
rears its ugly head again :-).
--
Thanks,
Maxim
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Tue, 26 Sep 2023 11:24:06 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 227 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.