Sounds like the font files themselves in that folder were system links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link so the fonts actually live elsewhere. In general, you do *not* want to change the folder structure outside of your /usr/home/USERNAME folder since the package management & OS rely on it.
I’d start by fining which package installs the font and creates the symlinks and then force install it. For Debian-based distros, I often use the Ubuntu package search to see which package contains the files I’m looking for. In this case, it looks like “font-dejavu-core”: http://packages.ubuntu.com/wily/all/fonts-dejavu-core/filelist http://packages.ubuntu.com/wily/all/fonts-dejavu-core/filelist
If the font is back, then the issues related to GEM looking in the wrong path could be fixed via IOHannes or some GEM dev updating/making a new font search path to GEM. In the meantime, you can do a quick and dirty fix by making a symlink from the new font dir to the one GEM is looking for:
sudo ln -s /usr/share/fonts/truetype/dejavu/ /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-dejavu/
This way you will have both folders & one of them is just a link to the other.
Dan Wilcox @danomatika https://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Dan Wilcox danomatika@gmail.com wrote:
Well, now I know...
I don't quite get this, can you elaborate? If I type "locate fonts-dejavu-core" I get this: /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/AUTHORS /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/BUGS /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/README /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/changelog.Debian.gz /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/changelog.gz /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/copyright /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/langcover.txt.gz /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/status.txt.gz /usr/share/doc/fonts-dejavu-core/unicover.txt.gz /var/lib/dpkg/info/fonts-dejavu-core.conffiles /var/lib/dpkg/info/fonts-dejavu-core.list /var/lib/dpkg/info/fonts-dejavu-core.md5sums
Yes, I thought about making a symbolic link after I wrote the previous email (and obviously after I stupidly changed the name of the dejavu directory). But if I create this dejavu directory and create a symbolic link in it (afterwards I will create the ttf-dejavu, but now I'm also missing dejavu), which file should the symbolic link point to? Typing "locate dejavu-sans-mono" outputs this: /etc/fonts/conf.avail/20-unhint-small-dejavu-sans-mono.conf /etc/fonts/conf.avail/57-dejavu-sans-mono.conf /etc/fonts/conf.d/20-unhint-small-dejavu-sans-mono.conf /etc/fonts/conf.d/57-dejavu-sans-mono.conf
Is any of these files the one I need? This thread is quite off-topic, but maybe not 100%...
That’s why I suggested reinstalling the package that installs the fonts & creates the symlink. If you force reinstall it, the symlinks should be recreated so things are back to where tou started. *Then* you can make the symlink to the missing folder.
Also, by “search for the package that contains the font”, I meant search *online* using the Ubuntu package search (my method at least), not on your local computer. My search turned up the package named: "fonts-dejavu-core”.
Since you’re on Debian, then you can do something like http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/debian-ubuntu-linux-reinstall-a-package-using-apt-get-command/:
sudo apt —reinstall fonts-dejavu-core
Dan Wilcox @danomatika https://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/
On Feb 24, 2016, at 10:51 AM, Alexandros Drymonitis adrcki@gmail.com wrote:
But if I create this dejavu directory and create a symbolic link in it (afterwards I will create the ttf-dejavu, but now I'm also missing dejavu), which file should the symbolic link point to?
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Dan Wilcox danomatika@gmail.com wrote:
That worked! Actually the command was "sudo apt-get install --reinstall fonts-dejavu-core". Now both Pd and [text2d] find their fonts, thanks!
On 02/24/2016 07:06 PM, Alexandros Drymonitis wrote:
hmm, you are experiencing a bug in the "gem" package as shipped with Ubuntu.
please report a bug against the "gem" package (using the reportbug
cmdline tool), describing your problem.
gamrds IOhannes
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:10 PM, IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
Never reported a bug before. Also never heard of the reportbug
cmdline
tool. I'm only aware of the "Report a bug" from Pd's help menu. Should I
use that? I guess I should open a new ticket, right?
On 02/25/2016 04:21 PM, Alexandros Drymonitis wrote:
no. when i said "use the 'reportbug' cmdline tool" i meant "please use the 'reportbug' cmdline" tool, like that:
reportbug gem
'reportbug' is a tool installed on Debian and derivatives to report bugs against system installed packages. since the bug you are experiencing has nothing to do with Gem itself but *only* with the "gem" package provided by your distribution, you should report a bug with your distribution, and not on the pd-gem sourceforge bugtracker (and not at all at the pure-data sourceforge bugtracker).
this is explained here
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/reportbug
(ah yes, 'reportbug' is for reporting bugs against Debian, not necessarily against ubuntu; since i believe that he bug is really in the Debian packaging (Ubuntu usually doesn't add much on top of the Debian packages), it should probably reported as I said)
gfmards IOhannes