On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Keith Packard <keithp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-06-08 at 22:24 +0400, Evgeniy Stepanov wrote: > >> Yes, it was because of cache incompatibility. > > There's a version number in the cache file -- you can bump that and it > should re-create/skip cache files with the wrong number. > >> Why does the global cache path in fonts.conf come before the one in user home >> directory? This way fc-cache from user account does absolutely nothing, cache >> files from .fontconfig are not even opened if there is a file with the same >> name in system directory. > > They're supposed to have precisely the same content, and it's always > better to share across multiple users as these files are mmapped, so > sharing the file means sharing physical pages. > >> Sure, even if both patches are correct, it is better to keep cache file >> compatibility. > > Any addition to the list of standard names must be accompanied by a > cache version bump. > Would this be FC_CACHE_CONTENT_VERSION in fcint.h? -- www.ipaqah.com _______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
