pugh@cornell.UUCP (William Pugh) (05/15/85)
I just got the new upgrade and found out that Apple's new Font/DA Mover will still not support font ID numbers greater than 255! Why..? Has Apple decided that this is a feature, or are they simply to stupid to fix it? It's only a 2 line fix - I wrote a Font Manager program for Quick & Dirty disk#1 (by Dreams of the Phoenix), and it's simple to handle large font ID numbers. Bill Pugh Cornell University
gus@Shasta.ARPA (05/17/85)
> > I just got the new upgrade and found out that Apple's new Font/DA > Mover will still not support font ID numbers greater than 255! Why..? > Has Apple decided that this is a feature, or are they simply to stupid to > fix it? It's only a 2 line fix - I wrote a Font Manager program for > Quick & Dirty disk#1 (by Dreams of the Phoenix), and it's simple to handle > large font ID numbers. > Bill Pugh > Cornell University As I understand, there may be bugs in the ROM font manager that keep fonts with negative resource ID's from working correctly. Gus Fernandez
lsr@apple.UUCP (Larry Rosenstein) (05/29/85)
In article <5504@Shasta.ARPA> gus@Shasta.ARPA writes: > >As I understand, there may be bugs in the ROM font manager that keep >fonts with negative resource ID's from working correctly. > I don't think there is any problems with the font manager handling negative resource IDs. (MacTerminal, for example, has a private font with a negative resource ID.) I talked to the person who did the Font/DA Mover, and the real answer is that he was trying to handle owned resources. Owned resources are supposed to have negative resource IDs. Unfortunately, he failed to heed the fine print in Inside Macintosh which says that fonts (as well as some other resource types) can't be owned resources and must be special cased. -- Larry Rosenstein Apple Computer UUCP: {nsc, dual, voder, ios}!apple!lsr CSNET: lsr@Apple.CSNET