fonts-bugs February 2024

fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
18 discussions

[Bug 1761885] New: rpm -V complains about mode for ghost .uuid files
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 25 Feb '24

25 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761885 Bug ID: 1761885 Summary: rpm -V complains about mode for ghost .uuid files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: fontpackages Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: mtasaka(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Link ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 1564432 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: rpm -Va complains a lot about mode of %ghost .uuid files: .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/paktype-naqsh/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/lilypond/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/sil-padauk/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/google-droid/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/lilypond/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/smc-suruma/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/google-android-emoji/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/google-crosextra-carlito/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/lohit-assamese/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/lohit-telugu/.uuid .M....... g /usr/share/fonts/lilypond/.uuid ..... Looks like fontpackages-devel template rpmmacro creates .uuid which %ghost %atttr(0000) e.g. [root@localhost ~]# rpm -qf /usr/share/fonts/google-droid/.uuid google-droid-sans-fonts-20120715-16.fc31.noarch [root@localhost ~]# rpm -qlv google-droid-sans-fonts | grep uuid ---------- 1 root root 0 7月 25 23:03 /usr/share/fonts/google-droid/.uuid ref: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fontpackages/blob/master/f/fontpackages-… but I guess %transfiletriggerin script by fontconfig creates .uuid as 0755 permission (perhaps) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fontpackages-filesystem-1.44-25.fc31.noarch fontconfig-2.13.92-3.fc31.x86_64 fontconfig-2.13.92-3.fc31.i686 google-droid-sans-fonts-20120715-16.fc31.noarch How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. See above, try $ rpm -Va 2. 3. Actual results: See above, lots of .uuid permission complaint Expected results: No complaint by rpm -Va Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 20

[Bug 2210428] Red Hat Mono Regular shows up as italic
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 21 Feb '24

21 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2210428 --- Comment #3 from James <james(a)ettle.org.uk> --- The issue is still present with the VF variant in redhat-mono-vf-fonts-4.0.3-7.fc40.noarch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2210428 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 0

[Bug 2265259] New: google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts fails to upgrade from F39 -> F40
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 21 Feb '24

21 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265259 Bug ID: 2265259 Summary: google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts fails to upgrade from F39 -> F40 Product: Fedora Version: 40 OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: google-noto-fonts Severity: high Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: msuchy(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora During upgrade from F39 to F40 I get this error: Problém 3: package google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts-20230801-4.fc39.noarch from @System requires google-noto-fonts-common = 20230801-4.fc39, but none of the providers can be installed - google-noto-fonts-common-20230801-4.fc39.noarch from @System does not belong to a distupgrade repository - problém s nainstalovaným balíčkem google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts-20230801-4.fc39.noarch Problém 4: package network-scripts-ppp-2.5.0-3.fc39.x86_64 from @System requires network-scripts, but none of the providers can be installed This is because the subpackage google-noto-sans-phags-pa-fonts in F39 that is named differently in F40 google-noto-sans-phagspa-fonts. Mind the difference between phagspa vs. phags-pa. This blocks upgrades for users from F39. Here is policy regarding renaming packages https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#renaming-or-repl… Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. sudo dnf --releasever=40 --setopt=module_platform_id=platform:f40 \ --enablerepo=updates-testing \ $(rpm -q fedora-repos-modular >/dev/null && echo --enablerepo=updates-testing-modular) \ --assumeno distro-sync -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265259 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 5

[Bug 2112732] New: Fail to build from source
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 19 Feb '24

19 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112732 Bug ID: 2112732 Summary: Fail to build from source Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: campivisivi-titillium-fonts Assignee: luya_tfz(a)thefinalzone.net Reporter: tagoh(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, luya_tfz(a)thefinalzone.net Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Titillium_roman_upright_italic_2_0_OT.zip contains two directory. one is Titillium_roman_upright_italic_2_0_OT which is specified as a base directory in the spec file. another one is __MACOSX. the spec file doesn't clean up __MACOSX, thus, the build stop on extracting like: + /usr/lib/rpm/rpmuncompress -x /var/home/tagoh/rpmbuild/SOURCES/Titillium_roman_upright_italic_2_0_OT.zip replace __MACOSX/Titillium_roman_upright_italic_2_0_OT/._Titillium-Black.otf? [y]es, [n]o, [A]ll, [N]one, [r]ename: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): campivisivi-titillium-fonts-20120913-25.fc37 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1.download SRPM 2.rpmbuild --rebuild campivisivi-titillium-fonts-20120913-25.fc37.src.rpm 3.try again once the rebuild finished. Actual results: the rebuild always fails except first try. Expected results: the rebuild should be successfully finished any time. Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2112732

1 4

[Bug 2264616] New: fonttools-4.49.0 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Feb '24

17 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264616 Bug ID: 2264616 Summary: fonttools-4.49.0 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: fonttools Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: pnemade(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 4.49.0 Upstream release that is considered latest: 4.49.0 Current version/release in rawhide: 4.48.1-1.fc40 URL: https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_M… Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/7388/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fonttools -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264616 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 4

[Bug 1580458] [ta_IN] Error in latest Tamil ttf
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Feb '24

14 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1580458 Parag Nemade <pnemade(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #17 from Parag Nemade <pnemade(a)redhat.com> --- versioning issue has been fixed in rawhide/F40. Rendering issue will also be fixed soon. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1580458 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 0

[Bug 2263197] New: fonttools-4.48.1 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 07 Feb '24

07 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263197 Bug ID: 2263197 Summary: fonttools-4.48.1 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: fonttools Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: pnemade(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 4.48.0, 4.48.1 Upstream release that is considered latest: 4.48.1 Current version/release in rawhide: 4.47.2-4.fc40 URL: https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_M… Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/7388/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fonttools -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2263197 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 4

[Bug 2259962] New: noto symbol font incorrect for PDF / Postscript
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Feb '24

02 Feb '24

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259962 Bug ID: 2259962 Summary: noto symbol font incorrect for PDF / Postscript Product: Fedora Version: 39 URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SrcMEFqI26un4MAxh2OHd oTbOi9hgM4v OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: google-noto-fonts Keywords: Desktop Severity: medium Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: vk2bea(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora google-noto-fonts package installs configuration files - /etc/fonts/conf.d/58-google-noto-sans-symbols2.conf and /etc/fonts/conf.d/58-google-noto-sans-symbols-vf.conf which cause Postscript platform font /Symbol to use NotoSansSymbols[wght].ttf # fc-match Symbol NotoSansSymbols[wght].ttf: "Noto Sans Symbols" "Regular" This font does not have the glyphs required for the standard platform font "Symbol" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbol_(typeface) This should not hijack /Symbol name ... the correct file could be StandardSymbolsPS.t1. This results in PDF files that use the Symbol font to produce no or wrong characters for the glyphs (example /Omega or /degree (see PDF file https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SrcMEFqI26un4MAxh2OHdoTbOi9hgM4v). This file renders correctly using browsers (Chrome Firefox or Ghostscript) because they include Postscript core fonts but evince, okular, atril rely on Fedora to provide fonts. These applications do not render the symbol glyphs Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: view PDF with symbol glyphs from Postscript standard symbol font Actual Results: no symbol glyphs shown for PDF viewers using Fedora fonts (rather than built in Postscript core fonts) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259962 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-sp…

1 8

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs February 2024