fonts-bugs January 2010

fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

25 participants
231 discussions

[Bug 499902] Restructure the fontconfig settings for CJK languages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499902 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- External Bug ID| |FreeDesktop.org 20911 -- 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 0

[Bug 499902] Restructure the fontconfig settings for CJK languages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499902 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |554911 -- 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 0

[Bug 554911] New: remove WQY Zenhei from 65-nonlatin.conf
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: remove WQY Zenhei from 65-nonlatin.conf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554911 Summary: remove WQY Zenhei from 65-nonlatin.conf Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: high Component: fontconfig AssignedTo: besfahbo(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: petersen(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 Depends on: 499902 Blocks: 476459 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: Even after adding lang tags to wqy-zenhei-fonts (current default Chinese font in f13 rawhide) it still overrides the Japanese font (vlgothic). Removing "WenQuanYi Zen Hei" from 65-nonlatin.conf fixes the problem. How reproducible: every time Steps to Reproduce: 1. install rawhide or boot rawhide live spin 2. start Japanese desktop 3. remove 65-nonlatin.conf Actual results: 2. Chinese font used for Japanese 3. Japanese font used Expected results: 2. Japanese font used Additional info: Personally I am inclined just to get rid of 65-nonlatin.conf completely. -- 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 0

[Bug 476459] Chinese wqy-zenhei-fonts overrides Japanese default font
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476459 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |554911 -- 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 0

[Bug 476459] Chinese wqy-zenhei-fonts overrides Japanese default font
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476459 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|low |medium Blocks| |507681(F13Blocker) Summary|wqy-zenhei-fonts needs lang |Chinese wqy-zenhei-fonts |fontconfig |overrides Japanese default | |font -- 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 0

[Bug 499902] Restructure the fontconfig settings for CJK languages
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499902 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |507684(F13Target) -- 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 0

rpms/liberation-fonts/F-12 liberation-fonts.spec,1.45,1.46
by cchance 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/F-12 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv10077 Modified Files: liberation-fonts.spec Log Message: * Wed Jan 13 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.2.20091019-5.fc13 - Removed 'Provides liberation-fonts and liberation-fonts-compat by liberation-fonts-common.' Index: liberation-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/F-12/liberation-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.45 retrieving revision 1.46 diff -u -p -r1.45 -r1.46 --- liberation-fonts.spec 12 Jan 2010 04:54:10 -0000 1.45 +++ liberation-fonts.spec 12 Jan 2010 23:59:54 -0000 1.46 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ New. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Summary: Fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Windows fonts Version: 1.05.1.20090721 -Release: 3%{?dist} +Release: 4%{?dist} # The license of the Liberation Fonts is a EULA that contains GPLv2 and two # exceptions: # The first exception is the standard FSF font exception. @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem >= 1.13 Obsoletes: liberation-fonts < 1.04.93-7 Obsoletes: liberation-fonts-compat <= 1.05.1.20090630 -Provides: liberation-fonts, liberation-fonts-compat %description -n %{fontname}-fonts-common %common_desc @@ -113,6 +112,10 @@ mkfontscale %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} rm -rf %{buildroot} %changelog +* Wed Jan 13 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.2.20091019-4.fc12 +- Removed 'Provides liberation-fonts and liberation-fonts-compat by + liberation-fonts-common.' + * Tue Jan 12 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.1.20090721-3 - Uses default file permission in files. - Provides liberation-fonts, and liberation-fonts-compat by liberation-fonts-common

1 0

rpms/liberation-fonts/devel liberation-fonts.spec,1.47,1.48
by cchance 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9770 Modified Files: liberation-fonts.spec Log Message: * Wed Jan 13 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.2.20091019-5.fc13 - Removed 'Provides liberation-fonts and liberation-fonts-compat by liberation-fonts-common.' Index: liberation-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel/liberation-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.47 retrieving revision 1.48 diff -u -p -r1.47 -r1.48 --- liberation-fonts.spec 12 Jan 2010 05:22:04 -0000 1.47 +++ liberation-fonts.spec 12 Jan 2010 23:58:13 -0000 1.48 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ New. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Summary: Fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Windows fonts Version: 1.05.2.20091019 -Release: 4%{?dist} +Release: 5%{?dist} # The license of the Liberation Fonts is a EULA that contains GPLv2 and two # exceptions: # The first exception is the standard FSF font exception. @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem >= 1.13 Obsoletes: liberation-fonts < 1.04.93-7 Obsoletes: liberation-fonts-compat <= 1.05.1.20090630 -Provides: liberation-fonts, liberation-fonts-compat %description -n %{fontname}-fonts-common %common_desc @@ -113,6 +112,10 @@ mkfontscale %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} %__rm -rf %{buildroot} %changelog +* Wed Jan 13 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.2.20091019-5.fc13 +- Removed 'Provides liberation-fonts and liberation-fonts-compat by + liberation-fonts-common.' + * Tue Jan 12 2010 Caius 'kaio' Chance <k at kaio.me> - 1.05.2.20091019-4.fc13 - Rebuilt w/ macro fixes.

1 0

[Bug 533919] Review Request: mplus fonts - The M+ family of fonts designed by Coji Morishita
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533919 --- Comment #5 from Igshaan Mesias <igshaan.mesias(a)gmail.com> 2010-01-12 06:44:24 EST --- Hi Nicolas, Upstream released a new version. I'm packaging that version and have completely re-written the spec file, though, still adhering to the points below. > Anyway, the review: > > 1. (not blocking) you don't include any fontconfig files, they would make your > user's life a lot easier (however, CJK is quite a mess in fontconfig, so maybe > it's better that way for now. Let's see what CJK users think of it) I have yet to come up with a decent fontconfig, but for now I'll be omitting it. > 2. (not blocking) rpmlint complains at the licensing string. I know the MPlus > license has been approved by spot, so it's not a legal problem. However I fear > all the repo-checking scripts will complain at you because of that. Please open > a fedora rpmlint bug so the license gets added to its list. (however upstream > would have made our life easier by using a standard font license such as the > OFL or the GPL with font exception) I have filed a bug against rpmlint, and it seems the issue has now been resolved ie, I no longer get rpmlint errors about the licensing at version 0.91. > 3. (not blocking) rpmlint complains some of the lines you used in descriptions > are too long. Please break them in smaller (<80) bits > > 4. (blocking) same problem for at least one for your summaries > I've made sure all the lines in the summary and descriptions are less than 80 characters. > 5. (not blocking) it seems rpmlint grew a spell-checker in fedora-devel. Please > fix the spelling mistakes it has identified (ie everything which is not a human > name) For someone who's native language should be english, I hope I fixed all the spelling mistakes. > 6. (blocking) please make sure your Source0 is a full URL pointing to the > source file. That will make your future packager life a lot easier (we have > many sf-hosted projects in Fedora, so it can be done) I have placed a url pointing to the tarball in the Source tag. > 7. (not blocking) you don't need to repeat the "Group: User Interface/X" > line in Fedora releases with a recent rpm I have removed the unnecessary Group tags from subpackages. > 8. (not blocking) it would be nice if each sub-package had a different summary. > What is the difference between 1c and 2c ? the one is Type 1 the other is Type 2. > 9. (blocking) m++ipa.pe is a build script, it has nothing to do in %doc I am excluding the build script for now. > 10. (not blocking) you don't need to specify %dir %{_fontdir} in the common > subpackage, it will be added automatically to each font subpackage removed. > 11. (not blocking) it's mostly cosmetic, but it would be nice if the font files > cased the style names they declare (ie "Bold" instead of "bold"). Apps are not > always smart enough to correct this I will try and fix, with some help as I am still newbie when it comes to fonts. > 12. (not blocking) a few font files declare an "heavy" weight. The standard > qualifier for "heavy" is "Black". That means weight selection won't work as > expected in apps not smart enough to try every possible "Black" legacy alias. > Please ask upstream to change this (also please have upstream check they did > mean "Black" and not some other weight). Standard style qualifiers and their > meaning have been described by Microsoft in the following whitepaper: > http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx Should I speak to upstream about this? > 13. (not blocking) the fonts fall just short of complete coverage for several > languages and unicode blocks (we only test if a language/block needs less than > 10 glyphs to be finished). Please relay upstream so it gets a chance to > complete them (for example, ab is incomplete because the Unicode consortium > added two glyphs to it this year IIRC) AFAIK the font is not complete as of yet. > 14. (not blocking) it would be nice if upstream included the text of their > license in the fonts copyright field, and not just "Copyright(c) 2009 M+ FONTS > PROJECT" without licensing info I have spoke to upstream regarding this, he seems unwilling to change the license. > 15. (not blocking) it would be nice if upstream released a source archive with > source files and build scripts, so we can re-build in Fedora using our own > fontforge version (that helps finding bugs in fontforge, and as our fontforge > improves, so do the fonts we build with it) I have yet to ask upstream. Would you kindly confirm whether the above is OK before I post the links to the new srpms and spec files. Thanks, Igshaan -- 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 0

[Issue 105085] math: OpenSymbol font overhaul will require code changes
by mru＠openoffice.org 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=105085 User mru changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Additional comments from mru(a)openoffice.org Tue Jan 12 10:45:04 +0000 2010 ------- Verified in tl76. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification

1 0

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 January 2010