fonts-bugs July 2009

fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

25 participants
519 discussions

[Bug 510174] New: Version Info is not updated.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 27 Jul '10

27 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Version Info is not updated. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510174 Summary: Version Info is not updated. Product: Fedora Version: 11 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: liberation-fonts AssignedTo: cchance(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: cchance(a)redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: cchance(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com Depends on: 503430 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: Version is not 1.02. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): liberation-fonts-1.05.1.20090706 How reproducible: Always. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install the font. 2. Open the fonts in /usr/share/fonts/liberation/* with fontforge. 3. Check with font info. Actual results: 1.02 Expected results: 1.05.1.20090706 or 1.05.1 or 1.05. Additional info: N/A -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 466029] New: fonts.dir refers to non-existent .bdf files, breaking accesses
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: fonts.dir refers to non-existent .bdf files, breaking accesses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466029 Summary: fonts.dir refers to non-existent .bdf files, breaking accesses Product: Fedora Version: 9 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: fonts-KOI8-R AssignedTo: than(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: goeran(a)uddeborg.se QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: than(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Description of problem: The file /usr/share/fonts/KOI8-R/misc/fonts.dir contains two entries for each font, one for the pcf.gz file and one for a bdf file that isn't included in the package. Apparently, the presence of the bdf entry breaks accesses to these fonts. As an example, it contains: 9x15s.bdf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--15-140-75-75-c-90-koi8-ub 9x15s.pcf.gz -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--15-140-75-75-c-90-koi8-ub Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fonts-KOI8-R-1.0-10.fc8.noarch How reproducible: Every time Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install fonts-KOI8-R 2. xfd -fn 9x15 Actual results: Warning: Cannot convert string "9x15" to type FontStruct xfd: no font to display Expected results: A window with the font displayed. Additional info: The bug can be avoided by rerunning mkfontdir in /usr/share/fonts/KOI8-R/misc. (And trigger the X server to reread its font files.) But there is no RPM script or other automatic way this is done. It must be done "by hand" after installation by the system administrator. And after doing this, the package fails a verify check by RPM. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 13

[Bug 22579] New: OO.o devs think DejaVu kerning is broken for windows apps
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22579 Summary: OO.o devs think DejaVu kerning is broken for windows apps Product: DejaVu Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: General AssignedTo: dejavu-bugs(a)lists.freedesktop.org ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com See http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=102911 « Every windows application that relies on the GDI call GetKerningPairs() will fail with these problematic fonts. On the other hand the font's kern table is valid and OOo is right that it trusts GDI to provide the kerning pairs. There are four ways to fix it: 1. fix Windows so that GetKerningPairs() ignores pairs it cannot handle 2. remove the problematic kernings from the DejaVu Serif fonts 3. make sure that every glyph mentioned in the kern table has a (proper or dummy) unicode inside the baseplane 4. make OOo and all other Windows applications avoid GDI calls and parse all font tables themselves » -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 497090] New: [bn][bn-IN][as] Invalid addition of Yaphala conjuncts are being rendered
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [bn][bn-IN][as] Invalid addition of Yaphala conjuncts are being rendered https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497090 Summary: [bn][bn-IN][as] Invalid addition of Yaphala conjuncts are being rendered Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: fonts-indic AssignedTo: rbhalera(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: runab(a)redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: rbhalera(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: In case of conjuncts with Yaphala (U09CD+U09AF), multiple Yaphala signs can be typed consecutively giving rise to invalid conjunct combinations. e.g ক্য্য্য্য (ক+্+য+্+য+্+য+্+য) This error could be replicated in gedit, kwrite and Openoffice.org Writer Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fonts-indic: 2.3.8-1.fc11 gedit : 2.26.1-1.fc11 openoffice.org: 3.1.0-9.2.fc11 kdebase : 4.2.2-2.fc11 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open gedit 2. Type in the following unicode values (for the above example) : U0995+U09CD+U09AF+U09CD+U09AF+U09CD+U09AF+U09CD+U09AF Actual results: The last 3 U09CD+U09AF pairs are allowed as part of the conjunct Expected results: The U09CD+U09AF pair should not be allowed to be rendered after another U09CD+U09AF. i.e. only one U09CD+U09AF pair can be used when combining with another consonant to form a conjunct. Additional info: Please do note that: U09AF+U09CD+U09AF is a valid conjunct combination, where two U09AF characters combine to form a conjunct (য্য) Screenshots: gedit: http://runab.fedorapeople.org/assorted-bugs/gedit-ya.png kwrite: http://runab.fedorapeople.org/assorted-bugs/kwrite-ya.png oowrite: http://runab.fedorapeople.org/assorted-bugs/oowrite-ya.png -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 19

[Bug 497768] New: [mai_IN] font-match is showing different fonts than language
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [mai_IN] font-match is showing different fonts than language https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497768 Summary: [mai_IN] font-match is showing different fonts than language Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Keywords: i18n Severity: medium Priority: low Component: fontconfig AssignedTo: besfahbo(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: aalam(a)redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: Machine with Rawhide, having Maithili(mai_IN) language only, while checking font for language, it is showing "Lohit Hindi", while maithili fonts are installed on machine. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fontconfig-2.6.99.behdad.20090318-1.fc11.i586 lohit-maithili-fonts-2.3.8-1.fc11.noarch How reproducible: Everytime Steps to Reproduce: 1. in gnome-terminal run, 2. $fc-match 3. Actual results: [aalam@333-333 ~]$ echo $LANG mai_IN [aalam@333-333 ~]$ fc-match lohit_hi.ttf: "Lohit Hindi" "Regular" Expected results: "Lohit Maithili" Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 477331] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477331 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: asana-math-fonts AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Blocks: 477044 Classification: Fedora After more than a month of consultation, feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved by FESCO. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new templates. The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package are not clear enough: ❄ andika-fonts ❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts ❄ bitstream-vera-fonts ❄ charis-fonts ❄ dejavu-fonts ❄ ecolier-court-fonts ❄ edrip-fonts ❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts ❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts ❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts ❄ gfs-complutum-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-fonts ❄ gfs-eustace-fonts ❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts ❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts ❄ gfs-gazis-fonts ❄ gfs-jackson-fonts ❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts ❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts ❄ gfs-olga-fonts ❄ gfs-porson-fonts ❄ gfs-solomos-fonts ❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts ❄ stix-fonts ❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages, nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines. A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before the F11 release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 11

[Bug 477333] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477333 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: brettfont-fonts AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Blocks: 477044 Classification: Fedora After more than a month of consultation, feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved by FESCO. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new templates. The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package are not clear enough: ❄ andika-fonts ❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts ❄ bitstream-vera-fonts ❄ charis-fonts ❄ dejavu-fonts ❄ ecolier-court-fonts ❄ edrip-fonts ❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts ❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts ❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts ❄ gfs-complutum-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-fonts ❄ gfs-eustace-fonts ❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts ❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts ❄ gfs-gazis-fonts ❄ gfs-jackson-fonts ❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts ❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts ❄ gfs-olga-fonts ❄ gfs-porson-fonts ❄ gfs-solomos-fonts ❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts ❄ stix-fonts ❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages, nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines. A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before the F11 release. Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 477398] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477398 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: icelandic-fonts AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or several font files: repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb' -f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e 's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]$.*$src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq Unfortunately the script does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can close this bug report now. Otherwise, you should know that: - Fedora guidelines demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_… - our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Please make your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide. If your package is not principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed in the correct fontconfig directories. It is preferred to make a font package or subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a font family is given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family The new templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe. The following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: - andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts - dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts - gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts - gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts - gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts - gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts - gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts - gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 10

[Bug 477449] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477449 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: roadstencil-fonts AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or several font files: repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb' -f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e 's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]$.*$src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq Unfortunately the script does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can close this bug report now. Otherwise, you should know that: - Fedora guidelines demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_… - our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Please make your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide. If your package is not principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed in the correct fontconfig directories. It is preferred to make a font package or subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a font family is given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family The new templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe. The following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: - andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts - dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts - gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts - gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts - gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts - gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts - gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts - gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 10

[Bug 477459] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Jul '10

22 Jul '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477459 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: sportrop-fonts AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or several font files: repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb' -f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e 's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]$.*$src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq Unfortunately the script does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can close this bug report now. Otherwise, you should know that: - Fedora guidelines demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_… - our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Please make your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide. If your package is not principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed in the correct fontconfig directories. It is preferred to make a font package or subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a font family is given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family The new templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe. The following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: - andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts - dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts - gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts - gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts - gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts - gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts - gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts - gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 10

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
...
52
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs July 2009