R2.1.0: X11 font at size 14 could not be loaded
Hi,
Many thanks to Prof. Ripley, Peter Dalgaard, and Patrick Connolly for
responding to my message. I tried several things, but the problem still
exists.
[1] I tried
Version 2.1.0 (2005-04-18),
Version 2.1.0 Patched (2005-04-20), and
Version 2.1.0 Patched (2005-04-28)
Compiled with/without option --disable-mbcs (and/or
--disable-nls), the result is the same:
> hist(rnorm(100))
Error in title(main = main, sub = sub, xlab = xlab, ylab = ylab, ...) :
X11 font at size 14 could not be loaded
Interesting,
> plot(rnorm(100))
works just fine.
[2] Using YaST, I installed
XFree86-fonts-100dpi - 100dpi Bitmaps fonts for X11
which originally was not there, but still have the same error.
As stated previously, this error does not occur with R2.0.1 on the same
machine. Any clue re what could be wrong with my setting? For my purpose,
R2.0.1 is sufficient, but it would be nice to get this problem solved.
Thanks and have a good weekend.
Xiang-Jun
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Patrick Connolly wrote:
On Thu, 28-Apr-2005 at 05:25PM -0400, Xiang-Jun Lu wrote: |> Hi, |> |> I have just noticed the following problem with R2.1.0 running on SuSE 9.1, |> [However, version 2.0.1 (2004-11-15) on the same machine works Okay]: |> |> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |> >hist(rnorm(100)) |> Error in title(main = main, sub = sub, xlab = xlab, ylab = ylab, ...) : |> X11 font at size 14 could not be loaded |> >version |> _ |> platform i686-pc-linux-gnu |> arch i686 |> os linux-gnu |> system i686, linux-gnu |> status Patched |> major 2 |> minor 1.0 |> year 2005 |> month 04 |> day 20 |> language R |> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |> |> Any insight? Works fine with mine.
version
_ platform i686-pc-linux-gnu arch i686 os linux-gnu system i686, linux-gnu status major 2 minor 1.0 year 2005 month 04 day 18 language R
Something to do with the patch, perhaps?
There is no patch on the X11 device. The dpi of the screen does come into this. It is quite possible that 2.0.1 failed to scale for the screen dpi and so was using the wrong set of fonts (it used 75dpi unless the screen was 100+/-0.5 dpi). So I think PD was correct: this does indicate a problem in the installed fonts: perhaps the 100dpi set is missing. -- Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595