[Fontconfig] Adding FC_POSTSCRIPT_NAME
akira at tagoh.org
Wed Feb 6 02:24:47 PST 2013
Yes, you're right. I'm trying to address that issue in next release as far
as possible though, bumping the cache version quickly isn't also a good
idea. the value in FC_POSTSCRIPT_NAME itself will not be changed once it's
available. so it's not that bad thing to do that this time, without even
the match part in the worst case anyway...
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:38 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad at behdad.org> wrote:
> On 02/05/2013 03:57 AM, Akira TAGOH wrote:
> > Hi,
> > In next release, some new objects will be added to the cache and
> planning to
> > bump the cache version due to that. as I posted before, regarding to
> this, I
> > have one more plan to add new object, FC_POSTSCRIPT_NAME (too long?)
> into the
> > cache. it may be a good time to do so during this breakage. that said, I
> > haven't yet addressed all of issues around it. so I won't update the
> > this time because not giving any effects to the score.
> > any comments?
> Ideally matching on POSTSCRIPT_NAME is what PDF viewers want ,so it would
> rather useless without the match part.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Fontconfig