Issue 19214 - 1.1: Printing/font changes from PORTS
Summary: 1.1: Printing/font changes from PORTS
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: porting
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.1 RC4
Hardware: Mac Mac OS X, all
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: OOo 1.1.1
Assignee: fa
QA Contact: issues@porting
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-09-07 16:19 UTC by fa
Modified: 2004-10-15 15:11 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: PATCH
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---


Attachments
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile (61.01 KB, patch)
2003-09-07 16:24 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff
cd vcl, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile (21.50 KB, patch)
2003-09-07 16:24 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile (62.67 KB, patch)
2003-10-05 04:26 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff
cd vcl, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile (20.92 KB, patch)
2003-10-05 04:27 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile SUPERCEDES previous psprint 100403 patch (62.52 KB, patch)
2003-10-05 04:45 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile Corrects job name switch for both lp and lpr (1001 bytes, patch)
2003-11-09 18:08 UTC, fa
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description fa 2003-09-07 16:19:57 UTC
Patches attached apply the PORTS printing and font features specific to Mac OS X to a checkout of 
1.1RC4.  There are still lots of problems, as these patches haven't really been updated for 1.1, but 
simply apply the changes from PORTS.  For example:

1) ghostscript 7.x doesn't want to work with Apple Chancery (perhaps others) when printing to PDF 
converter (NOT File->Export to PDF, but through the Print dialog).  It core dumps.
2) Export to PDF doesn't work either with Apple Chancery (perhaps others too), just gives a blank 
PDF
3) psprint does not correctly find the CUPS printer PPDs for printers and falls back to SGENPRT

What _does_ work:
1) Font antialiasing and kerning of Apple fonts (both type 0 and type 2 kerning)

I have not tested printing at this time at all.
Comment 1 fa 2003-09-07 16:24:03 UTC
Created attachment 9073 [details]
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile
Comment 2 fa 2003-09-07 16:24:29 UTC
Created attachment 9074 [details]
cd vcl, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile
Comment 3 riccardo 2003-09-08 08:52:03 UTC
Hi, do you think that this patches cold solve the issue 19030, or at
least, is 19030 reated to the problems Dan points out?
I would like to be sure wether the 19030 is related to code or to my
build..
Bye, and thanks
Ricky
Comment 4 fa 2003-09-09 15:46:02 UTC
Hi,

Issue 19030 is only somewhat related to problems here, but it is NOT
solved by the patches here.  The PDF export code is actually
completely separate from the psprint PostScript generation code (ie
the old Print to PostScript stuff which then gets run through
GhostScript to create a PDF).  So these patches don't impact
Export->PDF.  However, this is something that will need to be dealt
with anyway.  I suggest that tracking of the Export->PDF bug be dealt
with in Issue 19030 .

Dan
Comment 5 fa 2003-10-05 04:26:54 UTC
Created attachment 10006 [details]
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile
Comment 6 fa 2003-10-05 04:27:28 UTC
Created attachment 10007 [details]
cd vcl, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile
Comment 7 fa 2003-10-05 04:28:25 UTC
Revised patches for 1.1 final:

psprint.11update.100403.patch
vcl.11update.100403.patch

These patches make sure printing actually works.

Dan
Comment 8 fa 2003-10-05 04:45:32 UTC
Created attachment 10009 [details]
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile   SUPERCEDES previous psprint 100403 patch
Comment 9 fa 2003-10-05 04:46:11 UTC
The two patches to use to patch 1.1.0 are:

psprint.11update.100403-2.patch
vcl.11update.100403.patch
Comment 10 stx123 2003-10-13 10:12:05 UTC
Could someone review before applying to the 1.1.1 cws.
Comment 11 sander_traveling 2003-10-13 10:19:15 UTC
I thought the PORTS syncup patches were going to go through the rcmac
cws, seems the plan chnaged?

At any rate, Dan mailed dev@porting asking for the pacth to be
reviewed before application. 
Comment 12 khendricks 2003-10-13 15:17:27 UTC
Hi,  
  
Please clarify why the updated version of these patches that were previously  
approved for the PORTS tree need to be approved once again?  
  
The rules used to be - anything previously approved for an older tree did not have to  
be re-reviewed for a newer tree.  
  
Furthermore, why for previously reviewed or proven patches (such as from the  
PORTS tree which was cross-built on other platforms) do we have to wait for  
reviews just to get changes into a "child workspace" (and that is what the entire OOo  
trees are).  
  
In general, we really need to free up this process for "trusted" independent 
developers.  Dan will not knowingly break anything any more than I or anyone else 
that has been volunteering their time over the last 2 to 3 years would.    
 
Basically, he (and others like Ken, and Volker and etc) have proven that they can be 
trusted and we should start to relax the way-too-tight rules on tree commits now ... 
 
So unless we can guarantee timely reviews (and history has shown we can't ... I try  
my best but I just don't have the time to review all of the patches from independent  
developers and I am sure neither do others), why not use the "trust" model and open 
the process up a bit more.  
 
Especially, given the cross-platform tinderbox builds and the cws concept now  
employed by Hamburg, why not free this issue up and let's stop taking literally years  
to get patches into the trees.  
  
Kevin  
  
  
  
  
  
Comment 13 fa 2003-10-13 18:36:17 UTC
Sander,

Sorry, completely forgot what I had said about 11rcmac.  Did we get
rcmac synced with rc4 or rc5?  If so, then we can commit 1.1 patches
to rc mac and then let the resync happen before 1.1.1 gets out.

AFAIK, these two patches here and perhaps 1 or 2 more will be all that
needs to happen for 1.1.x on OS X.

Dan
Comment 14 sander_traveling 2003-10-13 20:18:05 UTC
its ok 8-)

11rcmac is synced up to rc5 / m19 (the leatest there is)

we can do more resyncs as needed (and when there are more milestones), 
and then merge the macosx chnages to 1.1 master when ready / qa-d.

It also shifts review out of critical path 
Comment 15 rt 2003-10-14 10:29:15 UTC
Hi Sander,

has it really been synced to m19? According to our internal tooling
base milestone for ooo11rcmac is still m13s2 ...

Rüdiger
Comment 16 fa 2003-11-03 03:49:23 UTC
Sander/Ruediger Timm

Can we get 11rcmac synced up to RC5?

Dan
Comment 17 fa 2003-11-09 18:08:59 UTC
Created attachment 11077 [details]
cd psprint, patch -p0 < /path/to/patchfile  Corrects job name switch for both lp and lpr
Comment 18 fa 2003-11-09 18:11:19 UTC
psprint.jobname.patch
psprint.11update.100403-2.patch
vcl.11update.100403.patch

committed to cws_srx645_ooo11rcmac
Comment 19 Martin Hollmichel 2004-10-15 15:11:31 UTC
close issue.