I installed games-roguelike/angband-4.2.2-r1 and when trying to run it: $ angband angband: Couldn't load the requested font. (10x20) As a dependency of angband media-fonts/font-misc-misc-1.1.2-r2 was also installed, which has the info: "Installed fonts changed. Run 'xset fp rehash' if you are using non-fontconfig applications.". So I installed xset and ran that command, but it did not help. Angband still fails to start in the same way.
Not sure if this is related, but: $ angband -msdl2 angband: cant render surface for cache in font '8x13x.fon': Couldn't find glyph
After installing xlsfonts: $ xlsfonts -fn "10*" xlsfonts: pattern "10*" unmatched So this shows that indeed the requested font is not available...
But: $ equery f media-fonts/font-misc-misc | grep '10x20.pcf' /usr/share/fonts/misc/10x20.pcf.gz shows that the required font is present.
$ grep '10x20.pcf' /usr/share/fonts/misc/fonts.dir 10x20.pcf.gz -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--20-200-75-75-c-100-iso10646-1 Shows the requested font is present in the fonts.dir file
From my Xorg.0.log:h. [ 27.845] (WW) `fonts.dir' not found (or not valid) in "/usr/share/fonts/misc/". [ 27.845] Entry deleted from font path. [ 27.845] (Run 'mkfontdir' on "/usr/share/fonts/misc/"). So that seems to be the problem. I wonder why mkfontdir was not run if it is needed.
Link to the same issue in the Xorg log (but from 2005): https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-413454-view-next.html
After a restart "angband [-mx11]" works (but it would be good to eliminate the need for that). Xorg.0.log now shows: [ 27.920] (==) FontPath set to: /usr/share/fonts/misc/ But $ angband -msdl2 angband: cant render surface for cache in font '8x13x.fon': Couldn't find glyph
I believe that the X11 case and the SDL2 case are not much related to each other. I have filed a separate issue for the SDL2 case: https://bugs.gentoo.org/820500
(In reply to Tee KOBAYASHI from comment #8) > I believe that the X11 case and the SDL2 case are not much related to each > other. > > I have filed a separate issue for the SDL2 case: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/820500 Thanks, that seems to correspond with what I am seeing in the sdl2 case, will comment there.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 820500 ***