After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 114858 - Add functions for dumping GnomeGlyphList and GnomePosGlyphList
Add functions for dumping GnomeGlyphList and GnomePosGlyphList
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-print
Classification: Deprecated
Component: general
2.2.1
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Jody Goldberg
Jody Goldberg
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2003-06-10 15:55 UTC by tony.graham
Modified: 2005-03-23 15:47 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
Sample functions for dumping GnomeGlyphList and GnomePosGlyphList (3.77 KB, text/plain)
2003-06-10 15:57 UTC, tony.graham 		Details

Description tony.graham 2003-06-10 15:55:40 UTC 
A GnomeGlyphList or GnomePosGlyphList is essentially write-only until it is
rendered.

For debugging applications that create GnomeGlyphList objects, it would be
useful to be able to dump the contents of a GnomeGlyphList or
GnomePosGlyphList.

Writing the debugging functions in an application that uses libgnomeprint
requires including gnome-glyphlist-private.h and gnome-pgl-private.h, which
is not even installed with the libgnomeprint header files.

Making the functions part of libgnomeprint would save applications delving
into parts of libgnomeprint that they don't normally need to know about.
Comment 1 tony.graham 2003-06-10 15:57:47 UTC 
Created attachment 17397 [details]
Sample functions for dumping GnomeGlyphList and GnomePosGlyphList
Comment 2 Andreas J. Guelzow 2003-11-22 14:19:03 UTC 
Please provide a patch (using -u) against cvs HEAD.
Comment 3 Kjartan Maraas 2004-04-18 12:12:53 UTC 
Tony? Could you use diff -u to produce the patch like Andreas requested?
Comment 4 Jody Goldberg 2005-03-23 15:47:33 UTC 
I'll bet you thought we forgot about this patch.
If so, you were RIGHT!

My apologies.  I've merged this in for 2.10.2.