Re: Could not open default font 'fixed'

[Harold L Hunt II <huntharo at msu dot edu>]

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
>
>
> > Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Jeff,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jeff Wolkove wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I had the above error when I attempted to run startxwin.bat. The FAQ says
> > > > > > > I should nudge the mailing list so here I am nudging. Does anyone know
> > > > > > > of a fix for this error? Let me know if you need any further details.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, we all know the answer, but it looks like it took me quite a long
> > > > > > time to get around to updating the FAQ :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is now a detailed answer were there was previously a request to
> > > > > > nudge the mailing list by 2003-01-31... I hope I mistyped that as 2003
> > > > > > when it really should have been 2004.  It would be a little silly if it
> > > > > > really took longer than a year to revisit this issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/cygwin-x-faq.html#q-error-font-eof
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Harold
> > > > >
> > > > > Harold,
> > > > >
> > > > > FWIW, you should be able to simply re-run any one of the
> > > > > /etc/postinstall/XFree86-f*.sh.done scripts... :-)
> > > > >     Igor
> > > >
> > > > I don't understand, please explain.
> > > > Harold
> > >
> > > Harold,
> > >
> > > First, all the postinstall scripts for XFree86-fnts, XFree86-f100,
> > > XFree86-fscl, XFree86-fcyr, and XFree86-fenc are the same -- that's the
> > > "any one of..." part.
> >
> > Right.
> >
> >
> > > Secondly, umount is already part of these scripts, and there should be no
> > > need to reinstall the package just to re-run the postinstall script, hence
> > > my suggestion (to just re-run the script from the command line).  Of
> > > course, if any of the font files are corrupt then reinstallation *is*
> > > needed.
> >
> > Sure, umount is part of those scripts, but I want my instructions to
> > work in all possible cases.  I could think of some weird instances where
> > someone had removed the postinstall scripts.  In any case, I don't want
> > to depend on those scripts being there.
> >
> > The second part of your answer indicates that you don't fully understand
> > the problem.  See, it goes like this:
> >
> > 1) You have an invalid mount point in the registry that points to
> > nowhere for /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts.
> >
> > 2) You have setup.exe install the fonts packages.
> >
> > 3) setup.exe extracts the fonts packages according to the mount points,
> > thus extracting the fonts packages to *nowhere*.
> >
> > 4) You do not actually have the files from the fonts packages on your
> > system.
> >
> > 5) You have to kill the invalid mount point, then resinstall the fonts
> > packages in order to actually get the files.
> >
> > Weird, eh?
> > Harold
>
>
> Eek.  You're absolutely right -- I didn't think of this...  However, there
> still should be no need for a "umount" in the instructions, as executing
> the postinstall scripts during the first install should have pointed the
> mount to the right place already.  A simple reinstallation of the fonts
> packages should suffice.

A simple reinstall has been shown to not always work... just search the 
mailing list archives.  It is sort of a Catch-22 situation.  Trust me, I 
spent a lot of time thinking about the different scenarios that have 
tripped people up, and I want to leave the instructions in the "most 
likely to work" state rather than in a "fewest possible steps" state.  I 
want it to work right the first time, everytime, and I don't want anyone 
having the steps fail then asking on the mailing list for us to explain 
this again.

> P.S. Unless explicitly deleted by some program or by the user, the scripts
> will be there.

That is what I don't want to count on.

Additionally, I am simply not comfortable writing step-by-step 
instructions for running the post-install script.  You are making it 
sound easier to describe in spoonfulls than I think it is.  I think 
you'll find that describing it in a bullet-proof manner will lead to a 
list of caveats three times longer than my simple umount instruction. 
For example, you would have to put in a caveat for if they last updated 
their fonts before a certain date, in which case they would not have a 
postinstall script at all.

We are wasting a lot of words on a issue that is already sufficiently 
addressed.  If you really want it changed, write the step-by-step 
instructions for it, convince me that they are easier and more reliable, 
and I will change it; otherwise, lets drop it.

Harold