ghostwriter is ready for your review

[Kevin Kofler]

Megan wrote:
> It's definitely not supposed to look like that.  I tried a fresh install
> on my machine (removing and rebuilding from scratch) but could not
> replicate the issue.  It's supposed to be using Font Awesome's font
> glyphs for the icons, since they are easily styled along with the normal
> text in QSS/CSS.  I also double checked that I don't have Font Awesome
> installed as a font.  Weird.

You probably have some other font that incorporates Font Awesome glyphs (or 
equivalent glyphs for the same code points). There are several "nerd fonts" 
that try to be supersets of multiple icon fonts including Font Awesome.

What is sure is that if you use icon fonts in the application, it has a 
dependency on the font, or a font, any font, providing those icons. That 
dependency must be documented.

And you also need to explicitly set the font of those buttons to Font 
Awesome or to whatever compatible font you decide to depend on. While 
fontconfig sometimes automatically falls back to the correct font when it 
hits a character not supported in the default font, there are reasons why 
that can fail, especially for private use area characters like the Font 
Awesome ones. And other operating systems might not even attempt to fall 
back to a font that actually provides the icon. Windows at least used to 
have no such fallback mechanism, though I have not used it for years, so 
that might have changed since.

        Kevin Kofler