<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED - Relocated caches not quite working" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106618#c7">Comment # 7</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_ASSIGNED " title="ASSIGNED - Relocated caches not quite working" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106618">bug 106618</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:sbergman@redhat.com" title="Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>"> Stephan Bergmann</a> <pre>(In reply to Akira TAGOH from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=106618#c6">comment #6</a>) > (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=106618#c5">comment #5</a>) > > But couldn't the lifetime of a fontconfig-internal mapped-pathname string, > > returned from FcPatternGetString(p,FC_FILE,...), be tied to the FcPattern *p > > internally in fontconfig? > > Yes. therefore gave up to modify it because no advantage of mmap'ing cache > files from the POV of memory footprint. Sorry, I don't understand your response. (I don't know much about fontconfig, nor about the motivations and details of the changes apparently made to fontconfig for the benefits of flatpak. What I as a LO developer would like to avoid if possible is a change in the fontconfig API, where LO would have to support both the old and new API for the foreseeable future. That's why I kept asking. But sure, if there is no good possibility to avoid that, then so be it.)</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>