On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 04:16:29PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
The tinderbox emails don’t give a link to the log, but quoting from the
email:
complextext.cxx:64:Assertion
Test name: VclComplexTextTest::testArabic
equality assertion failed
- Expected: 71x14@(0,1)
- Actual : 70x14@(1,1)
Looks similar to yours, which makes me wonder if the failures have a
common cause.
So looking at your numbers again:
SAL_DEBUG( "ID: " << rGlyph.maGlyphId << " " << rRect << " " <<
aGM.gmCellIncX << " " << aGM.gmCellIncY );
ID: 1397 4x3@(1,-10) 0 0
-ID: 5262 6x6@(1,-6) 6 0
-ID: 5269 3x7@(0,-7) 3 0
-ID: 5366 7x9@(0,-9) 7 0
-ID: 5269 3x7@(0,-7) 3 0
+ID: 5262 7x6@(0,-6) 6 0
+ID: 5269 4x7@(-1,-7) 3 0
+ID: 5366 8x9@(0,-9) 7 0
+ID: 5269 4x7@(-1,-7) 3 0
The ink box is identical in both cases, so it might be a difference in
glyph origin, can you compare that as well? Would removing those +1s at
the end make any difference?
Regards,
Khaled
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.