GNU bug report logs -
#57963
[PATCH 0/1] Support user's fontconfig.
Previous Next
Full log
Message #53 received at 57963 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Am Sonntag, dem 25.09.2022 um 16:29 +0900 schrieb Taiju HIGASHI:
> Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Am Sonntag, dem 25.09.2022 um 07:58 +0900 schrieb Taiju HIGASHI:
> > > Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > Anyway, it does look like your v2 is the way to go, with the
> > > > obvious caveat that using it is tricky: one needs to know about
> > > > fontconfig’s config file format and about sxml.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe we can go with v2 for now (it provides a useful “escape
> > > > hatch”) but prepare for more conventional configuration
> > > > bindings?
> > >
> > > By conventional configuration binding, do you mean adding
> > > something
> > > like home-fontconfig-configuration to provide a dedicated
> > > fontconfig
> > > configuration?
> > I think Ludo means that we should provide the most useful options
> > (like the fontconfig dirs) as dedicated record fields, while
> > leaving an "extra-config" escape hatch, that can be used with SXML
> > or a raw string for stuff that's too complicated (my personal
> > preference would still be SXML over the raw string, but YMMV).
>
> I see. For example,
>
> For example, would it be as follows?
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (service home-fontconfig-service-type
> (home-fontconfig-configuration
> (dir "~/.config/fontconfig/my-fonts1.conf"))
> (extra-config
> (list
> "<dir>~/.config/fontconfig/my-fonts2.conf")))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Since you can specify more than one dir, that'd be "dirs" or even
something more helpful like "font-directories". Note that those are
directories and not config files.
You corrected the extra-config thing in your reply, but also be aware
of the extra-config as SXML option.
>
> > > I have been reading the DTD and think it might be a bit of a
> > > challenge.
> > > https://github.com/freedesktop/fontconfig/blob/e291fda7d42e5d64379555097a066d9c2c4efce3/fonts.dtd
> > >
> > > However, I did notice one thing, and that is that there is an
> > > include element. I thought that if we had a configuration where
> > > the include element could be added, we could handle most of the
> > > use cases. What do you think of this idea?
> > I'd prefer extra-config over include – extra-config doesn't need to
> > go through file-like objects and an additional layer of G-
> > Expression quoting.
> >
> > Cheers
>
> It is difficult to determine which rules to define as records, but I
> thought that if I only had includes, I could handle most use cases.
Go for the obvious low-hanging fruits and typical use cases first.
Don't just add a field that requires a depth of 3 or more to be useful.
> For example, we assume that you will be able to write settings as
> follows:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (service home-fontconfig-service-type
> (home-fontconfig-configuration
> (includes
> (list
> (include
> (path "~/.config/fontconfig/my-fonts1.conf")
> (ignore-missing #t))))))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
> ref:
> https://github.com/freedesktop/fontconfig/blob/e291fda7d42e5d64379555097a066d9c2c4efce3/fonts.dtd#L59-L74
>
> Would it also fit with your assumption if we could also specify
> extra-config here?
>
> It is difficult to judge whether the ability to specify includes is
> useful or not, though, since extra-config alone will do the job.
Except for possibly some fringe use cases, include will be pointless if
you have extra-config, which is a better include :)
Cheers
This bug report was last modified 216 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.