contrary to OO, LO does not recognize the installed (bought!) postscript-fonts (type 1, p.e. Frutiger) on my iMac... OO 3.3 does this without any prob...
[This is an automated message.]
This bug was filed before the changes to Bugzilla on 2011-10-16. Thus it
started right out as NEW without ever being explicitly confirmed. The bug is
changed to state NEEDINFO for this reason. To move this bug from NEEDINFO back
to NEW please check if the bug still persists with the 3.5.0 beta1 or beta2 prereleases.
Details on how to test the 3.5.0 beta1 can be found at:
more detail on this bulk operation: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RFC-Operation-Spamzilla-tp3607474p3607474.html
I will look into this issue, so nobody else needs to do so. I will report the results as soon as I come to some conclusion ...
REPRODUCIBLE with LibreOffice 18.104.22.168 (Build-ID: 235ab8a-3802056-4a8fed3-2d66ea8-e241b80), German langpack installed, on MacOS X 10.6.8 German.
REPRODUCIBLE with LibreOffice 3.4.6, German langpack installed, on MacOS X 10.6.8 German.
REPRODUCIBLE with LOdev 3.6.0alpha0+ (Build ID: c92c5c6) (installation file: master~2012-05-03_05.23.04_LibO-Dev_3.6.0alpha0_MacOS_x86_install_en-US.dmg)
Classic Mac PostScript Type 1 fonts, consisting of the old combination of
* LWFN files, one for each font face (Regular, Italic, Bold ...), containing the actual PS1 fonts in the resource fork
* FFIL files or 'suitcases', at least one per font family, containing the bitmaps and some font family information in the resource fork,
work still fine with MacOS X 10.6.8 German: if installed, they show up in Apple's FontBook utility, and can be used with Apple's TextEdit Application, QuarkXPress, and many (most or all?) applications.
But not with LibreOffice. They just don't appear in the font menu, so you can't even try them. To reproduce, just install some classic Mac PostScript Type 1 fonts, start LibreOffice, create a new Writer document and check the font menu. No one of the fonts appears.
I remember this problem since I use LibreOffice. If I remember correctly, it was already present in 3.3.x (but I don't have an installed version of 3.3.x anymore, so I can't test. It is at least present since 4.0.
About the Importance of this Issue:
This problem looks minor, because most people use TrueType fonts (normal users, office users) or OpenType fonts (DTP and other professionals) now. But please don't underestimate the importance of this problem. Especially Mac users have often bought many expensive fonts from professional font developers like Adobe, Monotype, Berthold, URW, Linotype, Agfa, etc., and in the 1990s and even early 2000s, most of these fonts used the classic Mac PostScript Type 1 fonts format. I have already converted some old freeware PS1 fonts to OpenType PS format in order to make them usable for me with LibreOffice. But this conversion needs a good font editor like FontLab (expensive) or fontforge (hard to get for Mac), experience and time; it may be illegal or at least of disputed legality with commerical fonts; and is therefore not suitable for most users.
So it would be wonderful if this long-standing issue could get resolved ...
(Made summary a bit more precise.)
According to https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/FindTheExpert, you are our "Friendly expert" for MacOS issues ;-), therefore I have added you to the CC of this Mac-only bug report.
It is one of many many bugs, I know, but maybe you can find the time to take a look at it. The issue may be more important than it looks at the first glance (I know quite some people still using these old fonts, which were very expensive in the 1990s and 2000s).
And the issue is even more important if OOo really recognizes these fonts, but we don't do so :-(. If it is really a regression (can't test), it may even be rather easy to fix?!
Thank you very much!
A kind of “all clear” ('Entwarnung'): I just tested the new Apache OO 3.4 build for MacOS X, and it does not show the classic Mac PostScript Type 1 fonts either. If this is a regression, LibO and AOO share it ...
in OOO 3.3, these fonts positively were recognized and supported...
Thanks for Your efforts to solve this quest!
This issue is still apparent in the latest release candidate (22.214.171.124) under Ubuntu 13.04.
It is a bug of some importance, as it is a regression of functionality vs. Windows Office.
Folks have used these fonts in earlier documents, and want to be able to continue to use them (the fonts). It is quite an annoyance when one opens
It appears that OO (I tested this with 4.0.1) does *not* handle this correctly either.
I confirm this bug also occurs under Xubuntu 12.04 and Bodhi Linux 2.4.0 with LO 126.96.36.199. I have added both TrueType and Type 1 fonts to my system; other applications including leafpad and Abiword can successfully use both. LibreOffice sees only the TrueType fonts I've added.
Note, this problem is *not* present in LibreOffice under Windows 7. I have added Type 1 fonts to Win7 and used them successfully under LO 188.8.131.52. They also work in MSOffice programs.
Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help squash this bug.
Also, this applies to Type 1 fonts from any source, not just classic Mac. Several purchased fonts have this issue.
I don’t know about Mac, but on Linux you need AFM files as well as the Type 1 fonts, or our font manager will reject them as unusable (some info that is only available in AFM files are needed).
I see the bug has been altered to only reference Mac OSX and IA32 hardware. Should I open another bug for the same problem under Linux 32 and 64-bit? Seems odd to duplicate bugs but I'll be happy to do so.
Thank you, Khaled Hosny! I have verified the problem I see is due to a lack of .afm files. It doesn't explain why other apps seem to be able to work with only the .pfm files, though. I will update several forum posts with this info, as I am aware of many posts asking the same question. Is it acceptable to open a bug for an enhancement request to support operation without .afm?
(In reply to comment #12)
> Thank you, Khaled Hosny! I have verified the problem I see is due to a lack
> of .afm files. It doesn't explain why other apps seem to be able to work
> with only the .pfm files, though. I will update several forum posts with
> this info, as I am aware of many posts asking the same question. Is it
> acceptable to open a bug for an enhancement request to support operation
> without .afm?
I’d personally drop Type1 support altogther, but sure open an issue for may be someone else would be interested in adding .pfm support.
This issue needs a link to, or an attachment of, a sample (legally redistributable) font of the afflicted type seeing as there aren't any in a fresh MacOSX install
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding **
To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.
There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.
If you have time, please do the following:
Test to see if the bug is still present on a currently supported version of LibreOffice (4.4.2 or later)
If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the version of LibreOffice and your operating system, and any changes you see in the bug behavior
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a short comment that includes your version of LibreOffice and Operating System
Please DO NOT
Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not appropriate in this case)
If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so: 1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3)
2. Test your bug 3. Leave a comment with your results. 4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to "inherited from OOo"; 4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add "regression" to keyword
Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=libreoffice-qa
Thank you for your help!
-- The LibreOffice QA Team This NEW Message was generated on: 2015-05-02
*** Bug 95737 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
We are (officially) dropping support for Type 1 and other non-SFNT font formats in 5.3.
@Khaled, with ESC decision--this becomes a WONTFIX rather than invalid.