fontconfig warning: “/etc/fonts/fonts.conf”, line 100: unknown “element blank” The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In“tar: unrecognized option --warning” during 'apt-get install'How to fix Fontconfig errorHow do I figure out which font file is chosen for a system generic font alias?Why are some apt-get-installed fonts being ignored by fc-list, xfontsel, etc?Reload settings in /etc/fonts/conf.dTaking 30 seconds longer to boot after upgrade from jessie to stretchHow to match multiple font names with a single <match> element?Adding a custom font to fontconfigRemoving fonts from fontconfig <match> resultsBroken fonts after upgrading Firefox ESR to latest Firefox

How to type this arrow in math mode?

Multiply Two Integer Polynomials

What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?

Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

Identify boardgame from Big movie

slides for 30min~1hr skype tenure track application interview

Why do we hear so much about the Trump administration deciding to impose and then remove tariffs?

If I score a critical hit on an 18 or higher, what are my chances of getting a critical hit if I roll 3d20?

Can we generate random numbers using irrational numbers like π and e?

Worn-tile Scrabble

Output the Arecibo Message

What is the meaning of Triage in Cybersec world?

How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?

Shouldn't "much" here be used instead of "more"?

Delete all lines which don't have n characters before delimiter

Aging parents with no investments

Can someone be penalized for an "unlawful" act if no penalty is specified?

Is this app Icon Browser Safe/Legit?

What is the closest word meaning "respect for time / mindful"

Is there a symbol for a right arrow with a square in the middle?

What are the motivations for publishing new editions of an existing textbook, beyond new discoveries in a field?

Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)



fontconfig warning: “/etc/fonts/fonts.conf”, line 100: unknown “element blank”



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In“tar: unrecognized option --warning” during 'apt-get install'How to fix Fontconfig errorHow do I figure out which font file is chosen for a system generic font alias?Why are some apt-get-installed fonts being ignored by fc-list, xfontsel, etc?Reload settings in /etc/fonts/conf.dTaking 30 seconds longer to boot after upgrade from jessie to stretchHow to match multiple font names with a single <match> element?Adding a custom font to fontconfigRemoving fonts from fontconfig <match> resultsBroken fonts after upgrading Firefox ESR to latest Firefox



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2















Getting this error on my vps server:



fontconfig warning: "/etc/fonts/fonts.conf", line 100: unknown element "blank"


This is the file:



https://pastebin.com/VqcSgJ9x



How to fix it?










share|improve this question
























  • Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

    – Jacob Thomason
    Mar 8 at 23:05

















2















Getting this error on my vps server:



fontconfig warning: "/etc/fonts/fonts.conf", line 100: unknown element "blank"


This is the file:



https://pastebin.com/VqcSgJ9x



How to fix it?










share|improve this question
























  • Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

    – Jacob Thomason
    Mar 8 at 23:05













2












2








2








Getting this error on my vps server:



fontconfig warning: "/etc/fonts/fonts.conf", line 100: unknown element "blank"


This is the file:



https://pastebin.com/VqcSgJ9x



How to fix it?










share|improve this question
















Getting this error on my vps server:



fontconfig warning: "/etc/fonts/fonts.conf", line 100: unknown element "blank"


This is the file:



https://pastebin.com/VqcSgJ9x



How to fix it?







linux debian error-handling fontconfig






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 5 at 7:26







Ned St

















asked Mar 4 at 19:15









Ned StNed St

112




112












  • Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

    – Jacob Thomason
    Mar 8 at 23:05

















  • Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

    – Jacob Thomason
    Mar 8 at 23:05
















Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

– Jacob Thomason
Mar 8 at 23:05





Getting the same error when trying to launch headless Chrome in a docker container - still digging.

– Jacob Thomason
Mar 8 at 23:05










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














TL;DR: You should probably just ignore this warning.



If you feel a little bold you might try removing the <blank>...</blank> section from your /etc/fonts/fonts.conf file (maybe making a back-up first if you're not feeling quite so foolhardy). When I tried this, the warning went away. However, you may have noticed a scary looking message at the top of the file saying: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. IT WILL BE REPLACED WHEN FONTCONFIG IS UPDATED. LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN 'local.conf'. So this was probably not the right solution. (If you wondering why I did it anyways: I didn't see a local.conf, was too lazy to read the fine manuals, and figured that my hack getting overwritten was more like a feature than a bug anyway since maintainers would likely publish an official solution later anyway -- besides I wanted to learn.)



OK, let's back up now. This is (unsurprisingly) related to fontconfig's <blank> element, whose usage is described in the fontconfig docs as




<blank>
Fonts often include "broken" glyphs which appear in the encoding but are drawn as blanks on the screen. Within the element, place each Unicode characters which is supposed to be blank in an element. Characters outside of this set which are drawn as blank will be elided from the set of characters supported by the font.




The docs suggest that there's nothing with having these options defined. Also, they are specified in the DTD.
However, you may have noticed a related fontconfig API called FcBlanks (emphasis mine):




An FcBlanks object holds a list of Unicode chars which are expected to be blank when drawn. When scanning new fonts, any glyphs which are empty and not in this list will be assumed to be broken and not placed in the FcCharSet associated with the font. This provides a significantly more accurate CharSet for applications.



FcBlanks is deprecated and should not be used in newly written code. It is still accepted by some functions for compatibility with older code but will be removed in the future.




This suggests to me that they are allowed in the configuration file for compatibility but are not intended to be used any more.



Without more information I'm not sure in what context you're seeing this warning, however, lately I've seen it a lot with chromium / electron / Google Chrome. Taking a peek at chromium's external/fontconfig's commit history I noticed:



commit dc8326d3f116bb2a1425aa68660a332e351b6cb4
Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
Date: Fri Sep 15 01:20:56 2017 -0400

[fc-query] Remove --ignore-blanks / -b

Blanks are the new black, err, dead!

...

commit 8b46a518bda8ecb3c5e2dfb0c1e5fda99e40aa3e
Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
Date: Tue Sep 12 17:08:08 2017 -0400

Update documentation for removal of blanks

Patch from Jerry Casiano.



You can also see this in the 2.12.91 change log.
I suspect that the warning started appearing around the time chromium updated to this (or newer) version of fontconfig. It looks like that happened around June 2018 / chromium 69. Peeking at the DEPS file and third_party/fontconfig/BUILD.gn suggests that ba206df9b9a7ca300265f650842c1459ff7c634a (a couple commits newer than 2.13.1) is used for embedded builds meanwhile ChromeOS and Linux will use "the system version." If I understand correctly that means that when building chromium on/for Linux, build/install-build-deps.sh would have installed the latest libfontconfig1 package provided by the distribution (in my case 2.11.0-6.7+b1). At this point I looked around a little bit for more information about how my build of chromium was compiled, specifically, but then I lost interest. I assume the maintainers try to keep it in step with the rest of the distribution.



In the end, if I'm not terribly mistaken, all this message really means is that the configuration file contains some information (other than comments) that will not be used by the program that output it.



See also:



  • https://askubuntu.com/questions/1018056/font-config-error-launching-google-chrome-stable-from-the-command-line-on-14-04#1018057

  • https://github.com/felixrieseberg/ember-electron/issues/386





share|improve this answer








New contributor




iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "106"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f504335%2ffontconfig-warning-etc-fonts-fonts-conf-line-100-unknown-element-blank%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0














    TL;DR: You should probably just ignore this warning.



    If you feel a little bold you might try removing the <blank>...</blank> section from your /etc/fonts/fonts.conf file (maybe making a back-up first if you're not feeling quite so foolhardy). When I tried this, the warning went away. However, you may have noticed a scary looking message at the top of the file saying: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. IT WILL BE REPLACED WHEN FONTCONFIG IS UPDATED. LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN 'local.conf'. So this was probably not the right solution. (If you wondering why I did it anyways: I didn't see a local.conf, was too lazy to read the fine manuals, and figured that my hack getting overwritten was more like a feature than a bug anyway since maintainers would likely publish an official solution later anyway -- besides I wanted to learn.)



    OK, let's back up now. This is (unsurprisingly) related to fontconfig's <blank> element, whose usage is described in the fontconfig docs as




    <blank>
    Fonts often include "broken" glyphs which appear in the encoding but are drawn as blanks on the screen. Within the element, place each Unicode characters which is supposed to be blank in an element. Characters outside of this set which are drawn as blank will be elided from the set of characters supported by the font.




    The docs suggest that there's nothing with having these options defined. Also, they are specified in the DTD.
    However, you may have noticed a related fontconfig API called FcBlanks (emphasis mine):




    An FcBlanks object holds a list of Unicode chars which are expected to be blank when drawn. When scanning new fonts, any glyphs which are empty and not in this list will be assumed to be broken and not placed in the FcCharSet associated with the font. This provides a significantly more accurate CharSet for applications.



    FcBlanks is deprecated and should not be used in newly written code. It is still accepted by some functions for compatibility with older code but will be removed in the future.




    This suggests to me that they are allowed in the configuration file for compatibility but are not intended to be used any more.



    Without more information I'm not sure in what context you're seeing this warning, however, lately I've seen it a lot with chromium / electron / Google Chrome. Taking a peek at chromium's external/fontconfig's commit history I noticed:



    commit dc8326d3f116bb2a1425aa68660a332e351b6cb4
    Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
    Date: Fri Sep 15 01:20:56 2017 -0400

    [fc-query] Remove --ignore-blanks / -b

    Blanks are the new black, err, dead!

    ...

    commit 8b46a518bda8ecb3c5e2dfb0c1e5fda99e40aa3e
    Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
    Date: Tue Sep 12 17:08:08 2017 -0400

    Update documentation for removal of blanks

    Patch from Jerry Casiano.



    You can also see this in the 2.12.91 change log.
    I suspect that the warning started appearing around the time chromium updated to this (or newer) version of fontconfig. It looks like that happened around June 2018 / chromium 69. Peeking at the DEPS file and third_party/fontconfig/BUILD.gn suggests that ba206df9b9a7ca300265f650842c1459ff7c634a (a couple commits newer than 2.13.1) is used for embedded builds meanwhile ChromeOS and Linux will use "the system version." If I understand correctly that means that when building chromium on/for Linux, build/install-build-deps.sh would have installed the latest libfontconfig1 package provided by the distribution (in my case 2.11.0-6.7+b1). At this point I looked around a little bit for more information about how my build of chromium was compiled, specifically, but then I lost interest. I assume the maintainers try to keep it in step with the rest of the distribution.



    In the end, if I'm not terribly mistaken, all this message really means is that the configuration file contains some information (other than comments) that will not be used by the program that output it.



    See also:



    • https://askubuntu.com/questions/1018056/font-config-error-launching-google-chrome-stable-from-the-command-line-on-14-04#1018057

    • https://github.com/felixrieseberg/ember-electron/issues/386





    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
























      0














      TL;DR: You should probably just ignore this warning.



      If you feel a little bold you might try removing the <blank>...</blank> section from your /etc/fonts/fonts.conf file (maybe making a back-up first if you're not feeling quite so foolhardy). When I tried this, the warning went away. However, you may have noticed a scary looking message at the top of the file saying: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. IT WILL BE REPLACED WHEN FONTCONFIG IS UPDATED. LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN 'local.conf'. So this was probably not the right solution. (If you wondering why I did it anyways: I didn't see a local.conf, was too lazy to read the fine manuals, and figured that my hack getting overwritten was more like a feature than a bug anyway since maintainers would likely publish an official solution later anyway -- besides I wanted to learn.)



      OK, let's back up now. This is (unsurprisingly) related to fontconfig's <blank> element, whose usage is described in the fontconfig docs as




      <blank>
      Fonts often include "broken" glyphs which appear in the encoding but are drawn as blanks on the screen. Within the element, place each Unicode characters which is supposed to be blank in an element. Characters outside of this set which are drawn as blank will be elided from the set of characters supported by the font.




      The docs suggest that there's nothing with having these options defined. Also, they are specified in the DTD.
      However, you may have noticed a related fontconfig API called FcBlanks (emphasis mine):




      An FcBlanks object holds a list of Unicode chars which are expected to be blank when drawn. When scanning new fonts, any glyphs which are empty and not in this list will be assumed to be broken and not placed in the FcCharSet associated with the font. This provides a significantly more accurate CharSet for applications.



      FcBlanks is deprecated and should not be used in newly written code. It is still accepted by some functions for compatibility with older code but will be removed in the future.




      This suggests to me that they are allowed in the configuration file for compatibility but are not intended to be used any more.



      Without more information I'm not sure in what context you're seeing this warning, however, lately I've seen it a lot with chromium / electron / Google Chrome. Taking a peek at chromium's external/fontconfig's commit history I noticed:



      commit dc8326d3f116bb2a1425aa68660a332e351b6cb4
      Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
      Date: Fri Sep 15 01:20:56 2017 -0400

      [fc-query] Remove --ignore-blanks / -b

      Blanks are the new black, err, dead!

      ...

      commit 8b46a518bda8ecb3c5e2dfb0c1e5fda99e40aa3e
      Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
      Date: Tue Sep 12 17:08:08 2017 -0400

      Update documentation for removal of blanks

      Patch from Jerry Casiano.



      You can also see this in the 2.12.91 change log.
      I suspect that the warning started appearing around the time chromium updated to this (or newer) version of fontconfig. It looks like that happened around June 2018 / chromium 69. Peeking at the DEPS file and third_party/fontconfig/BUILD.gn suggests that ba206df9b9a7ca300265f650842c1459ff7c634a (a couple commits newer than 2.13.1) is used for embedded builds meanwhile ChromeOS and Linux will use "the system version." If I understand correctly that means that when building chromium on/for Linux, build/install-build-deps.sh would have installed the latest libfontconfig1 package provided by the distribution (in my case 2.11.0-6.7+b1). At this point I looked around a little bit for more information about how my build of chromium was compiled, specifically, but then I lost interest. I assume the maintainers try to keep it in step with the rest of the distribution.



      In the end, if I'm not terribly mistaken, all this message really means is that the configuration file contains some information (other than comments) that will not be used by the program that output it.



      See also:



      • https://askubuntu.com/questions/1018056/font-config-error-launching-google-chrome-stable-from-the-command-line-on-14-04#1018057

      • https://github.com/felixrieseberg/ember-electron/issues/386





      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















        0












        0








        0







        TL;DR: You should probably just ignore this warning.



        If you feel a little bold you might try removing the <blank>...</blank> section from your /etc/fonts/fonts.conf file (maybe making a back-up first if you're not feeling quite so foolhardy). When I tried this, the warning went away. However, you may have noticed a scary looking message at the top of the file saying: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. IT WILL BE REPLACED WHEN FONTCONFIG IS UPDATED. LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN 'local.conf'. So this was probably not the right solution. (If you wondering why I did it anyways: I didn't see a local.conf, was too lazy to read the fine manuals, and figured that my hack getting overwritten was more like a feature than a bug anyway since maintainers would likely publish an official solution later anyway -- besides I wanted to learn.)



        OK, let's back up now. This is (unsurprisingly) related to fontconfig's <blank> element, whose usage is described in the fontconfig docs as




        <blank>
        Fonts often include "broken" glyphs which appear in the encoding but are drawn as blanks on the screen. Within the element, place each Unicode characters which is supposed to be blank in an element. Characters outside of this set which are drawn as blank will be elided from the set of characters supported by the font.




        The docs suggest that there's nothing with having these options defined. Also, they are specified in the DTD.
        However, you may have noticed a related fontconfig API called FcBlanks (emphasis mine):




        An FcBlanks object holds a list of Unicode chars which are expected to be blank when drawn. When scanning new fonts, any glyphs which are empty and not in this list will be assumed to be broken and not placed in the FcCharSet associated with the font. This provides a significantly more accurate CharSet for applications.



        FcBlanks is deprecated and should not be used in newly written code. It is still accepted by some functions for compatibility with older code but will be removed in the future.




        This suggests to me that they are allowed in the configuration file for compatibility but are not intended to be used any more.



        Without more information I'm not sure in what context you're seeing this warning, however, lately I've seen it a lot with chromium / electron / Google Chrome. Taking a peek at chromium's external/fontconfig's commit history I noticed:



        commit dc8326d3f116bb2a1425aa68660a332e351b6cb4
        Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
        Date: Fri Sep 15 01:20:56 2017 -0400

        [fc-query] Remove --ignore-blanks / -b

        Blanks are the new black, err, dead!

        ...

        commit 8b46a518bda8ecb3c5e2dfb0c1e5fda99e40aa3e
        Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
        Date: Tue Sep 12 17:08:08 2017 -0400

        Update documentation for removal of blanks

        Patch from Jerry Casiano.



        You can also see this in the 2.12.91 change log.
        I suspect that the warning started appearing around the time chromium updated to this (or newer) version of fontconfig. It looks like that happened around June 2018 / chromium 69. Peeking at the DEPS file and third_party/fontconfig/BUILD.gn suggests that ba206df9b9a7ca300265f650842c1459ff7c634a (a couple commits newer than 2.13.1) is used for embedded builds meanwhile ChromeOS and Linux will use "the system version." If I understand correctly that means that when building chromium on/for Linux, build/install-build-deps.sh would have installed the latest libfontconfig1 package provided by the distribution (in my case 2.11.0-6.7+b1). At this point I looked around a little bit for more information about how my build of chromium was compiled, specifically, but then I lost interest. I assume the maintainers try to keep it in step with the rest of the distribution.



        In the end, if I'm not terribly mistaken, all this message really means is that the configuration file contains some information (other than comments) that will not be used by the program that output it.



        See also:



        • https://askubuntu.com/questions/1018056/font-config-error-launching-google-chrome-stable-from-the-command-line-on-14-04#1018057

        • https://github.com/felixrieseberg/ember-electron/issues/386





        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.










        TL;DR: You should probably just ignore this warning.



        If you feel a little bold you might try removing the <blank>...</blank> section from your /etc/fonts/fonts.conf file (maybe making a back-up first if you're not feeling quite so foolhardy). When I tried this, the warning went away. However, you may have noticed a scary looking message at the top of the file saying: DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE. IT WILL BE REPLACED WHEN FONTCONFIG IS UPDATED. LOCAL CHANGES BELONG IN 'local.conf'. So this was probably not the right solution. (If you wondering why I did it anyways: I didn't see a local.conf, was too lazy to read the fine manuals, and figured that my hack getting overwritten was more like a feature than a bug anyway since maintainers would likely publish an official solution later anyway -- besides I wanted to learn.)



        OK, let's back up now. This is (unsurprisingly) related to fontconfig's <blank> element, whose usage is described in the fontconfig docs as




        <blank>
        Fonts often include "broken" glyphs which appear in the encoding but are drawn as blanks on the screen. Within the element, place each Unicode characters which is supposed to be blank in an element. Characters outside of this set which are drawn as blank will be elided from the set of characters supported by the font.




        The docs suggest that there's nothing with having these options defined. Also, they are specified in the DTD.
        However, you may have noticed a related fontconfig API called FcBlanks (emphasis mine):




        An FcBlanks object holds a list of Unicode chars which are expected to be blank when drawn. When scanning new fonts, any glyphs which are empty and not in this list will be assumed to be broken and not placed in the FcCharSet associated with the font. This provides a significantly more accurate CharSet for applications.



        FcBlanks is deprecated and should not be used in newly written code. It is still accepted by some functions for compatibility with older code but will be removed in the future.




        This suggests to me that they are allowed in the configuration file for compatibility but are not intended to be used any more.



        Without more information I'm not sure in what context you're seeing this warning, however, lately I've seen it a lot with chromium / electron / Google Chrome. Taking a peek at chromium's external/fontconfig's commit history I noticed:



        commit dc8326d3f116bb2a1425aa68660a332e351b6cb4
        Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
        Date: Fri Sep 15 01:20:56 2017 -0400

        [fc-query] Remove --ignore-blanks / -b

        Blanks are the new black, err, dead!

        ...

        commit 8b46a518bda8ecb3c5e2dfb0c1e5fda99e40aa3e
        Author: Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>
        Date: Tue Sep 12 17:08:08 2017 -0400

        Update documentation for removal of blanks

        Patch from Jerry Casiano.



        You can also see this in the 2.12.91 change log.
        I suspect that the warning started appearing around the time chromium updated to this (or newer) version of fontconfig. It looks like that happened around June 2018 / chromium 69. Peeking at the DEPS file and third_party/fontconfig/BUILD.gn suggests that ba206df9b9a7ca300265f650842c1459ff7c634a (a couple commits newer than 2.13.1) is used for embedded builds meanwhile ChromeOS and Linux will use "the system version." If I understand correctly that means that when building chromium on/for Linux, build/install-build-deps.sh would have installed the latest libfontconfig1 package provided by the distribution (in my case 2.11.0-6.7+b1). At this point I looked around a little bit for more information about how my build of chromium was compiled, specifically, but then I lost interest. I assume the maintainers try to keep it in step with the rest of the distribution.



        In the end, if I'm not terribly mistaken, all this message really means is that the configuration file contains some information (other than comments) that will not be used by the program that output it.



        See also:



        • https://askubuntu.com/questions/1018056/font-config-error-launching-google-chrome-stable-from-the-command-line-on-14-04#1018057

        • https://github.com/felixrieseberg/ember-electron/issues/386






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer






        New contributor




        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        answered 2 days ago









        iX3iX3

        1034




        1034




        New contributor




        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.





        New contributor





        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        iX3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f504335%2ffontconfig-warning-etc-fonts-fonts-conf-line-100-unknown-element-blank%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -debian, error-handling, fontconfig, linux

            Popular posts from this blog

            Word for a person who has no opinion about whether god existsWord for having a definite opinion while simultaneously withholding judgment?What's the opposite of “newcomer? Is ”veteran" OK?What do you call an “atheist” who might believe in an afterlife?What's a word for someone who wants to voice opinions but not have them challenged?Word for someone who dismisses contrary opinions as irrational?Somone who thinks they are overly special/out of the ordinaryIs there a word, phrase or idiom for “a person who is incapable of thinking about the future”?The belief that a god is human-likeA word for a non-famous person/thing you have heard a lot aboutAdjective for a person who enjoys taking care of their appearance

            What was this official D&D 3.5e Lovecraft-flavored rulebook?What was this set of RPG tools called?As a first-time DM should I let my players play complex character classes and roles?Nymph's Kiss and the RelationshipWhat was the name of this Cleric Prestige Class that shapes metal with its bare hands?Are the 3.5e Dragonlance books third party or official works?What's up with the domain Vile Darkness?What was this 80s book about RPGs?What was the name of this Werewolf band?What book had Rituals to “upgrade” animal companions to keep them viable at higher levels?What was this RPG that had rules for player-owned businesses?

            2017 IndyCar Series Contents Series news Teams and drivers Schedule Season summary Footnotes References External links Navigation menu"INDYCAR: Initial 2018 bodywork concepts unveiled"the original"IndyCar confirms switch to Performance Friction brakes in 2017""AJ Foyt Racing will switch to Chevy"the original"Carlos Munoz, Conor Daly will drive for AJ Foyt Racing""Zach Veach's Indy 500 Debut Confirmed with Foyt""No mass exodus from Honda after Ganassi switch""Ex-F1 driver Sato joins Andretti Autosport for 2017 IndyCar season""IndyCar's Ryan Hunter-Reay, sponsor DHL paired through 2020""hhgregg and Andretti Autosport announce partnership for key races in 2016""INDYCAR: Rossi re-signs with Andretti"the original"McLaren Formula 1 - Fernando Alonso to race at Indy 500 with McLaren, Honda and Andretti Autosport""Shank will finally take part in Indy 500 with Harvey, Andretti | MotorSportsTalk""Andretti adds Jack Harvey to Indy 500 field""Ganassi switches to Honda power for 2017""INDYCAR: Chilton returns to Ganassi"the original"IndyCar silly season: Who's going where in 2017?""INDYCAR: Kanaan, NTT Data return to Ganassi"the original"Kimball to remain at Ganassi for 2017""Coyne confirms Bourdais for 2017 IndyCar season""Davison to sub for Bourdais in Indy 500"the original"Gutierrez confirmed for Detroit IndyCar debut""Gutierrez returns with Coyne for rest of 2017 season""Vautier to drive for Coyne at Texas"the original"INDYCAR: Coyne confirms Jones for 2017"the original"Pippa Mann returns to Coyne for Indy 500""Karam, Dreyer & Reinbold teaming up again for Indianapolis 500""Pigot to return to Ed Carpenter Racing""Hildebrand confirmed as full-time Ed Carpenter driver""Veach to replace injured Hildebrand at Barber"the originalNew Team Harding Racing Enters Chaves for 101st Indianapolis 500"Juncos Racing Announces Entry in 101st Running of the Indianapolis 500 :: Juncos Racing""Juncos confirms Pigot for Indy 500""Saavedra confirmed in Juncos' second 500 entry"the original"Lazier confirms Indy 500 run after son's USF2000 debut"the original"Claman DeMelo to race for RLLR at Sonoma"the original"Rahal signs Servia and ace engineer for 2017""IndyCar: Aleshin returns with Schmidt"the original"Aleshin replaced by Saavedra for Toronto""Jack Harvey will pilot SPM No. 7 car at Watkins Glen, Sonoma""Jay Howard confirmed in Tony Stewart's supported SPM Indy entry""INDYCAR: Newgarden to wave the flag at Penske"the original"Pagenaud opts for No. 1 in 2017"the original"Penske confirms Newgarden for 2017""Montoya to stay with Team Penske in 2017""Target leaving IndyCar after 27 seasons with Chip Ganassi""Cavin: IndyCar could see complete driver/team shakeup in 2017""End of the road for KV Racing?""KV Racing confirms closure, equipment sold to Juncos""Juncos confirms IndyCar Series entry"the original"Juncos readies IndyCar program, aims for '17 500"the original"Harding Racing to add Texas, Pocono to schedule"the original"Sato signs with Andretti Autosport for 2017""INDYCAR: Aleshin in Doubt at SPM"the original"Long Beach notebook: JR Hildebrand breaks hand""Hildebrand cleared to return at Phoenix"the original"Bourdais to undergo surgery on multiple fractures""Aleshin loses Schmidt Peterson IndyCar ride""Saavedra in at SPM for Pocono, Gateway"the original"Bourdais to make return at Gateway"the original"The IndyCar Grand Prix no longer is sponsored by Angie's List""2017 IndyCar Series rulebook""2017 Verizon IndyCar Series Official Rulebook"Official websiteeeeee