Bug 217193

Summary: ftview could not allocate display surface
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Reporter: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad>
Component: freetypeAssignee: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-11-25 15:00:33 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 212199    
Bug Blocks:    

Description Behdad Esfahbod 2006-11-24 23:23:33 UTC 
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #212199 +++

Description of problem:
I can't  seem to get ftview to work 

[apodtele@prosha dejavu-lgc]$ ftview 12 DejaVuLGCSans-Bold.ttf
could not allocate display surface
  error = 0x0000


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
freetype-demos-2.2.1-10

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

-- Additional comment from apodtele on 2006-11-17 10:44 EST --
Could this be a solution?
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/freetype/2006-11/msg00025.html

ftview seem to look for X under /usr/X11R6. So old-fashioned!

-- Additional comment from mclasen on 2006-11-17 16:25 EST --
Sounds likely. Thanks for the pointer

-- Additional comment from besfahbo on 2006-11-21 16:15 EST --
Thanks for the pointer.  Seems like it.  Last time I looked into it, I was
surprised to find that ftview is not linked to xlib at all.  This explains it.

-- Additional comment from apodtele on 2006-11-21 18:43 EST --
I look forward to seeing an update. ;) 


-- Additional comment from besfahbo on 2006-11-24 18:20 EST --
Fixed in freetype-2.2.1-14.fc6 submitted for Update Testing.
Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2006-11-25 15:00:33 UTC 
Behdad, correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this is just a duplicate of the
earlier clone bug 216222 ?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 216222 ***
Comment 2 Behdad Esfahbod 2006-11-27 06:40:40 UTC 
You are right.  My bad.