Patching Ubuntu Mono 0.86 (Ubntu 23.04) gives bad result #1302
Comments
|
Relevant messages are these:
The The hints are broken because VF hints can usually not work in static fonts. I'm astonished that there should be a newer version of Ubuntu Mono, because I just checked the latest font version on release Just re-checked:
You see, the Anyhow, try using the static version of |
|
What we could do is generating the static instances from the VF font file and use As I can find no information on 0.86, can not even download it separately from 23.04, the question is if this warranted. If you have any official information on 0.86, please add it here. Font redistributors like Google Fonts also still has 0.83 with Mono being 0.80. It is not much work to open the VF in (for example, because I mainly use that) |
|
@Finii this is the version reported by Can you explain what Font config The font I have on my system seem to be only these two TrueTypes, with other variants symlinked to these two files. Archive (w/symlinks): ubuntu-mono.tar.gz |
|
A bit of font history... There have been different and evolving ways to describe the look of the glyphs. One popular way with the advent of Postscript was the Postscript-Fonts. With these each glyph is defined by an outline that consists of splines. These are nowadays encountered in OpenType-CFF fonts ( People loved font families with lots of choices, but you were always limited by the amount of font files you need. Meanwhile there are fonts that have lots and lots of axis, like for example https://v-fonts.com/fonts/roboto-flex. Follow the link and try the sliders. This is all just one (1) small font file and some formulas. That is a variable font. Which axis they have is usually in the name with square brackets, so Anyhow, this is all 'new' stuff. Fontforge is not really able to work with fonts that have variable axis; instead old style fonts that are static (have no variables) are needed. Fontforge is a rather old program, and its invention predates variable fonts. Retrofitting variable font handling is something I guess surpasses the maintainers time and energy. If you design a font nowadays that shall have different weights you design it as variable font. For the poor people that can not use these font files you then usually instantiate some static fonts with selected combination of axis values. As I said, of course we could easily instantiate these fonts from UbuntuMono's variable font file, BUT The only real way to go for So, this should shed some light on
P.S. If you read my comment until here, thank you! I could generate the static UbuntuMono 0.86 files for you, that you can then self-patch. Depending on the autohinter that can work out or look ugly. It probably will look different. But you can try if you like it. Just tell me you like to do it - but do not complain about the looks 😬 |
|
Thanks for prompt response @Finii. I know the history, but my interest in computer graphics dropped significantly short before variable fonts went into mainstream. I've used some variable OTFs with InDesign in the past... but that's were my knowledge of the topic ends. Is it possible to generate statics focusing on size 13 to get accurate hinting for that size? They I can try patching myself. If I'm not happy I'll drop the idea of using them. I'm rare breed that actually like new lighter Ubuntu fonts... Thank you. |
|
Here the static versions: Ubuntu_static.tar.gz What I did... (fixed the 0326 glyph manually) 
|
|
OK, I've run patching... and the result is absolutely weird, @Finii: |
|
The names in your patched fonts look good. I see the same with your fonts:
Probably some references get broken; this can prevented by giving |
|
I'm not 100% sure why this happens, but you can fix this in this way:
Contents of the Edit: I believe you can let 25 and 26 in the fonts, just 27 and 28 need to be removed; you need to check the patched fonts. 25 targets |
|
Nope. Still o and a in the font. + |
|
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity (i.e. last half year) after it was closed. It helps our maintainers focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar, please open a new issue, complete the issue template with all the details necessary to reproduce, and mention this issue as reference. |
🗹 Requirements
🎯 Subject of the issue
The problem is pretty basic, I used Docker version of the patcher, end up with lot of warning and errors, but resulting file is not what I expected. The existing Ubuntu Mono Nerd is based on 0.80 that scales differently. The default size on Ubuntu 23.04 is 13 pt, but I have to scale the one from this repo to 15 to have the same size, but letters are thicker.
After patching 0.86 on originally installed on my Ubuntu I end up with smaller letters, the same line height, but some hinting gone as well. Screenshots from Gnome Terminal. Unfortunately these screenshots from Wayland are much blurrier than real image on my 4K screen, however, the difference is still visible.
Experienced behavior:
Expected behavior:
Example symbols:
Applies to whole font in general.
Log:
🔧 Your Setup
Anonymice Powerline Nerd Font Complete.ttf)?/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu/UbuntuMono\[wght\].ttfiterm2,urxvt,gnome,konsole)?★ Screenshots (Optional)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: