October 2017 - fonts-bugs - Fedora mailing-lists

[Bug 1449166] New: Shape for Serbian Cyrillic BE Wrong
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '18

30 Nov '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1449166 Bug ID: 1449166 Summary: Shape for Serbian Cyrillic BE Wrong Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: rosella.capriotti(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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1277346 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1277346&action=edit DELTA and Serbian BE in Liberation 2 Description of problem: On Lubuntu 17.04 & Libreoffice 5.3.1.2, the shape of Serbian Cyrillic BE in Liberation Serif v.2 looks uncannily like Greek DELTA. The shape in version 1 seems to me more appropriate. I added two attachments for the two versions of Liberation Serif: on both Greek DELTA is on the right for the sake of comparison. Regards -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 8

[Bug 1498269] New: Noto Color Emoji and Noto Emoji fixed fonts cause a X error in a tcl/ tk script
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Nov '18

27 Nov '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1498269 Bug ID: 1498269 Summary: Noto Color Emoji and Noto Emoji fixed fonts cause a X error in a tcl/tk script Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: google-noto-fonts Severity: high Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: jlc(a)cfl.rr.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1333924 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1333924&action=edit test script do demonistrate emoji fix font causing an X error Description of problem: The NCID (Network Caller ID) client is written in tcl/tk. When the google-noto-emoji-fonts became part of the standard install for Fedora, the ncid client would cause an X error and crash every time it scanned for fixed fonts. The attached script was written to determine and verify the problem. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): google-noto-emoji-fonts-20170827-1.fc26.noarch How reproducible: Reproducible every time test script run on Fedora 26 and also Fedora 25. Steps to Reproduce: 1. run attached test script 2. 3. Actual results: X Error of failed request: BadLength (poly request too large or internal Xlib length error) Major opcode of failed request: 138 (RENDER) Minor opcode of failed request: 20 (RenderAddGlyphs) Serial number of failed request: 476 Current serial number in output stream: 539 Expected results: Expected script not to cause an X error and crash. Additional info: Uncomment the two Noto Emoji font lines in testfonts.tk to not get the X error. The bug is also reported at https://core.tcl.tk/tk/tktview/3767882e066523dc9ae4 but it is considered a font problem not a tk problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 14

[Bug 1427550] New: Adding additional Glyphs in Tamil
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Nov '18

27 Nov '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427550 Bug ID: 1427550 Summary: Adding additional Glyphs in Tamil Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: lohit-tamil-fonts Severity: medium Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: nsesha92(a)yahoo.co.in QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1258398 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1258398&action=edit Svarita Deerga Svarita Anudatta eg Description of problem: This is not a bug, but enhancement request. Tamil language script is also used for writing other language text such as Sanskrit, Hindi, Malayalam, Telugu and Kannada in the form of transliteration. However Tamil script and the associated Unicode range U0B80-U0BFF does not contain many characters that are available in these other languages - mainly the Devanagari Extended unicode UA8E0 and Devanagari Vedic Extentions unicode U1CD0 series. Some such requests that I have come across in my FB and other groups: 1. How can I include the signs like lines above the letters as shown in the picture. This is required to show the swaram i.e. high or low pitch of pronouncing the letter/word as in Sanskrit. This kind of lines are used in Sanskrit also. 2. I need to type musical notations in Tamil Using MSword processor. To indicate octave we put a dot on top or bottom of the letter. how to add ? --- My answer for above point 2: dot above = anuswara, dot below = nukta, Lohit Tamil does not contain nukta, but includes anuswara (U+0B82). --- While its lot easier to juggle around in Linux based systems by switching between different fonts, its very difficult in MS based applications. Hence, I am requesting that 9 such frequently used Glyphs be 'added' to the existing Lohit Tamil font. The existing Glyphs from Lohit-Devanagari.ttf can be 'leveraged' for this, no need to reinvent the wheel. Replace: U+0310 COMBINING CANDRABINDU >>> replace with VEDIC TONE CANDRABINDU / anunasika U+0901, thats in Devanagari range, to be consistent with all other scrips. Add: Signs: Visarga U+0903 ( as separate and distinct, in addition to Tamil Visarga U+0B83 ) AVAGRAHA U+093D CANDRABINDU VIRAMA U+A8F3 Combining signs/marks with Anchoring: NUKTA U+093C VEDIC TONE UDATTA / SVARITA U+0951 VEDIC TONE ANUDATTA U+0952 VEDIC TONE PRENKHA U+1CD2 VEDIC TONE DOUBLE/Deerga SVARITA U+1CDA VEDIC TONE CANDRA U+1CF4 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Not a bug, but enhancement request. Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 16

[Bug 1336042] New: Liberation Fonts not displayed correctly
by Red Hat Bugzilla 21 Oct '18

21 Oct '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1336042 Bug ID: 1336042 Summary: Liberation Fonts not displayed correctly Product: Fedora Version: 24 Component: liberation-fonts Severity: high Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: freepenguin84(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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1157360 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1157360&action=edit Screenshots to show the difference between Fedora 22 and 23/24 Description of problem: Liberation Fonts are not being diplayed correctly. This is obvious on websites where the text is shifted some pixel up compared to Fedora 22 and other OSes. Fedora 23 has the same issue. The source files for liberation font is the same in Fedora 22-24 but the output *.ttf files are different. Installing the RPMs from Fedora 22 in Fedora 24 fixes the problem. Maybe the output has changed due to updated build tools? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 1.07.4 How reproducible: Open Webpage in Firefox or Google Chrome Steps to Reproduce: Open https://github.com/solus-project/budgie-desktop in Firefox Actual results: Text is shifted upwards besides the images (see attached screenshot) Expected results: Text aligned with images (see attached screenshot) Additional info: https://plus.google.com/+ViktorPankraz/posts/L8KVUGEbHxz -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 50

[Bug 1380754] New: Missing kerning pair for the Czech language ďá
by Red Hat Bugzilla 09 Oct '18

09 Oct '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1380754 Bug ID: 1380754 Summary: Missing kerning pair for the Czech language ďá Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: scholarsfonts-cardo-fonts Assignee: pnemade(a)redhat.com Reporter: mcepl(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1206277 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1206277&action=edit illustration of the problem Description of problem: This is just to record the unfortunate missing kerning pair for ďá (used in Czech, for example “devil” is “ďábel”). I will try to investigate which other kerning pairs are missing. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): scholarsfonts-cardo-fonts-1.045-12.el7.noarch How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1.print the standard Czech pangram “Příliš žluťoučký kůň úpěl ďábelské ódy.” 2. 3. Actual results: space between ď and á in the word “ďábelské” is awful Expected results: It shouldn't be Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 8

[Bug 525872] New: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data
by Red Hat Bugzilla 05 Oct '18

05 Oct '18

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=525872 Summary: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: qt AssignedTo: than(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: rdieter(a)math.unl.edu, than(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com, ltinkl(a)redhat.com Blocks: 182235,473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: The Debian fonttool packager noticed a problem in fonttool's embedded Adobe CMap and AGLFN data and got Adobe to release them under a good license This data is embeded in many packages, including yours Please rebuild your package using an external shared Adobe CMap and AGLFN data package FE-LEGAL since this was all triggered by a legal checl Debian-side See also http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/log/2009/09/24/adobe-data-freed/ http://lwn.net/Articles/354360/ http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/cmap/CMap+Resources -- 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.

2 20

[Bug 1094779] New: No Cyrillic Italic Glyphs for Sans, Sans Narrow and Mono
by Red Hat Bugzilla 25 Sep '18

25 Sep '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094779 Bug ID: 1094779 Summary: No Cyrillic Italic Glyphs for Sans, Sans Narrow and Mono Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: alescesc1986(a)yahoo.it QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com It's wrong for Liberation Sans, Sans Narrow and Mono to have specific italic glyphs in the Cyrillic range provided that the Latin range has slanted glyphs. For the sake of consistency, slanted glyphs should be implemented in the Cyrillic range too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=k7Die5I6Dr&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 12

[Bug 1464310] New: Tilded G not works with Liberation Sans and Serif
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Sep '18

14 Sep '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1464310 Bug ID: 1464310 Summary: Tilded G not works with Liberation Sans and Serif Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: shanshandehongxing_1234(a)hotmail.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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Guarani letter G̃ does not works if I use Liberation Sans and Serif, this letter requiring combining tilde. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Coping this letter from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarani_alphabet 2. Pasted into LibreOffice 3. Switch font face to Liberation Sans or Liberation Serif Actual results: With Liberation Sans/Serif tilded G does not works as expected. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 1096336] New: Liberation 2.00.x missing unicode hyphen (U+2010)
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Sep '18

10 Sep '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1096336 Bug ID: 1096336 Summary: Liberation 2.00.x missing unicode hyphen (U+2010) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: elbart(a)gmx.de QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: The liberation-fonts 2.00.0 and 2.00.1 are missing the unicode hyphen (U+2010). Versions 1.07.4 and older have that glyph. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.00.1 The regressing commit is https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/liberation-fonts.git/commit/?id=5feb93675… (slow!) प्रविण सातपुते "sfd file converted from ttf" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=N1bvIUoqeP&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 14

[Bug 1084493] New: Missing MIDDLE DOT (u+00B7) glyph for Liberation Sans Italic
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Sep '18

10 Sep '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084493 Bug ID: 1084493 Summary: Missing MIDDLE DOT (u+00B7) glyph for Liberation Sans Italic Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: jmontane(a)softcatala.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 882714 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=882714&action=edit Screenshot showing the bug Description of problem: In Windows, there is no glyph for MIDDLE DOT (U+00B7) when using Liberation Sans Italic, an empty space is showed. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.00.1 How reproducible: Install Liberation Sans Italic files in a Windows machine (tested in Windows 7 32 and 64 bits). The esay way is installing LibreOffice 4.2, :) Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open a new document LibreOffice Writer 2. Type "cel·la" (cell) "·" is U+00B7 3. Select "cel·la" text and set format as "Libreration Sans, Italic". Actual results: 4.- "cel la" is showed in italics,you can copy and paste and set other font. Expected results: 5.- "cel·la" Additional info: U+00B7 is a used character for Catalan text. So, please, fix this issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1MRhFWVfJa&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 17

[Bug 1072095] New: Liberation Sans renders most Latin combining characters incorrectly
by Red Hat Bugzilla 10 Sep '18

10 Sep '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1072095 Bug ID: 1072095 Summary: Liberation Sans renders most Latin combining characters incorrectly Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 870161 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=870161&action=edit Comparison between Helvetica, Arimo, and Liberation Sans Description of problem: Liberation Sans renders most Latin Unicode combining characters incorrectly. These are the diacritics and tie characters in the Unicode range U+0300 to U+FE2F (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combining_character) In particular: 1. The diacritics do not take into account the width or height of the paired character (which I imagine is a kerning issue) 2. Tie characters are always positioned incorrectly. They are supposed to visually tie two characters together, but in Liberation Sans they are simply centered under the 2nd character. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): version 2.00.1 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install Liberation Sans 2. Go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kaldari/Font_test Actual results: Diacritics and ties are a mess. Expected results: See Helvetica example in attached file. Additional info: The best way to understand this bug is to look at the attached file (comparison.png). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xTTdgh7sKr&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 25

[Bug 1088033] New: Text Figures for Liberation Fonts
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1088033 Bug ID: 1088033 Summary: Text Figures for Liberation Fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: alescesc1986(a)yahoo.it QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Hello Pravin, I was wondering whether you might consider adding text figures to your fonts. That'd be great and I don't think it'll take you long. Regards -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tODxrdeHtL&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 23

[Bug 1375061] New: RFE: try switching to Liberation Fonts 2 again
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375061 Bug ID: 1375061 Summary: RFE: try switching to Liberation Fonts 2 again Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: fedora(a)leemhuis.info QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: The freetype maintainer in https://www.freetype.org/freetype2/docs/subpixel-hinting.html recommends "using the Liberation family of fonts (version 2 and up, important!)" and criticises Fedora because it still ships version 1.x. I think it's time to try switching to v2 again. We tried that a few years ago (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Liberation_Fonts_2 ) and stopped it then due to problems (see Bug 856239); but from above recommendation it sounds like the problems we faced might be gone fixed in between. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 25

[Bug 1090631] New: Please set TT_NAME_ID_PREFERRED_FAMILY for Liberation fonts
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1090631 Bug ID: 1090631 Summary: Please set TT_NAME_ID_PREFERRED_FAMILY for Liberation fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: rhughes(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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: At the moment the TT_NAME_ID_PREFERRED_FAMILY is not set on any of the Liberation fonts. As I understand it, TT_NAME_ID_PREFERRED_FAMILY is supposed to be the same for all files in the same high-level family, and this seems to be what most other fonts do in Linux. For the next release could you please set the PreferredFamily key to just "Liberation" in all 10 files. This allows component installers like gnome-software to group the fonts together rather than showing them as separate entries and should have no other effects. Thanks, Richard. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Zd611y9wUR&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 7

[Bug 1009650] New: Some Serbian glyphs seem to be Latin glyph
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1009650 Bug ID: 1009650 Summary: Some Serbian glyphs seem to be Latin glyph Product: Fedora Version: 19 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: alescesc1986(a)yahoo.it QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Hello, I have a problem with Italic DE and GE: when I copy them from a pdf produced by XeLaTeX, they are pasted respectively as Latin G and I WITH MACRON. I'm puzzled, why does this happen? By the way, other Serbian glyphs aren't copied at all, but they told me this is XeLaTeX's fault, not font-dependent. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WUlCWOjbqa&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 48

[Bug 1013949] New: Problematic shapes for some letters of the macedonian alphabet.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013949 Bug ID: 1013949 Summary: Problematic shapes for some letters of the macedonian alphabet. Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Severity: high Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: pvelkovski(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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 805748 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=805748&action=edit Shoes how the letters look like, and what they should look like. Description of problem: The shape of the Regular (Normal) "Cyrillic macedonian small letter be" looks. It looks like the italic form minus the slant which is wrong! Also the letters "macedonian cyrilic ghe" and "macedonian cyrillic gje" look inconsistent in italic form. The "macedonian cyrilic gje" should look same as "macedonian cyrilic ghe" with an added accent. I'm attaching a pdf file that should explain the problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UhMfVgfR8e&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 15

[Bug 1014357] New: U+266B incorrect glyph with extra beam
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014357 Bug ID: 1014357 Summary: U+266B incorrect glyph with extra beam Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: fabian+redhat(a)greffrath.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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Originally reported as Debian #724839 [1] by Drake Wilson: " Using gucharmap 1:3.8.2-2 to view Liberation Serif characters with "Show only glyphs from this font" enabled, the glyph for U+266B BEAMED EIGHTH NOTES shows what is clearly beamed sixteenth notes instead; it should have only one beam rather than two. FontForge confirms this after opening LiberationSerif-Regular.ttf with SHA-256 = ea76595ed32ec4bb117fc715e393b4cca3d42cabe53101baec6bbbeb800fa26a. The glyph for U+266C BEAMED SIXTEENTH NOTES is correct. " The bug has been reported against version 2.00.1, ut I have checked with 1.07.3 and it is also present in this version. Best regards, Fabian [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=724839 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hFqMLHng7w&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 8

[Bug 1195216] New: To wide macron for Liberation Sans Narrow fonts
by Red Hat Bugzilla 28 Aug '18

28 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1195216 Bug ID: 1195216 Summary: To wide macron for Liberation Sans Narrow fonts Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: eko(a)lanet.lv QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 994356 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=994356&action=edit Too wide macron Description of problem: The macron (uni02C9) symbol in Liberation Sans Narrow fonts is too wide. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 1.07.4. How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: Look at following letters with Liberation Sans Narrow fonts: āēīōūĀĒĪŌŪ Actual results: See attached image Liberation_Sans_Narrow-old.png. Expected results: See attached image Liberation_Sans_Narrow-new.png. Additional info: A suggested path will be attached. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=sozGaFqcCe&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 13

[Bug 18928] New: RFE: add a gfx preview to font packages
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 21 Aug '18

21 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18928 Summary: RFE: add a gfx preview to font packages Product: PackageKit Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: General AssignedTo: richard(a)hughsie.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com The best way for a user to select a font is to show it to him. For this reason font sites commonly provide bitmap preview images or so-called specimen files (typically in PDF form) that showcase the font capabilities. http://gonzo.uni-weimar.de/~gerner/fonts/YanoneKaffeesatz.pdf http://www.ascendercorp.com/pdf/Droid_fonts.pdf Packagekit should do the same. The image should be a pangram http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pangrams in the main unicode blocks the font supports The specimen may include unicode coverage info, glyph table, etc For more info ask on fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- 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 8

[Bug 20120] New: Display font script coverage info in the UI
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 21 Aug '18

21 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20120 Summary: Display font script coverage info in the UI Product: PackageKit Version: unspecified Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: General AssignedTo: richard(a)hughsie.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com To make fonts auto-install work coverage auto-provides are being added to font packages. However, those provides are not only useful for auto-installation. Users are just as interested to know they can use a font package to render Greek or Catalan or Arabic when browsing the package repository manually. Please transform those provides in user-friendly information added to font package descriptions in packagekit GUI frontends. -- 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 1

[Bug 18725] New: RFE: allow merging of legacy font family names
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 20 Aug '18

20 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18725 Summary: RFE: allow merging of legacy font family names Product: fontconfig Version: 2.6 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: library AssignedTo: keithp(a)keithp.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Historically font formats only allowed four faces regular, bold, italic, bold italic. You had to use a separate font family to distribute condensed, heavy etc variants This has changed (cf http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx ) and modern fonts such as DejaVu include all faces under a single family name. Applications such as OO.o are being fixed to handle multifaced fonts Unfortunately there are still many historic fonts in the wild distributed in several sets of four faces (gs fonts, arial narrow, arial bold, etc). Those fonts currently appear under different family names in fontconfig-using apps. This is perturbing to users, since the same faces of historic and modern fonts are not handled the same way. Microsoft did some sort of magic in uniscribe to hide this distinction (irrelevant to users). Please provide a documented config pattern for font distributors that enables them to declare to fontconfig "font family A and font family B are the same, please expose all the associated faces under A name to users". (of course an application asking explicitely for B should still get it, but users would only see A in font lists) -- 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 7

[Bug 18723] New: RFE: fontconfig-level locl patching
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 20 Aug '18

20 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18723 Summary: RFE: fontconfig-level locl patching Product: fontconfig Version: 2.6 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: medium Component: library AssignedTo: keithp(a)keithp.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Due to Han unification and other similar stuff parts of some fonts may not be suitable for all locales. This is handled by the locl flag in modern opentype fonts. However there are still many non-opentype fonts in the wild, and it is not possible to convert them all at once (when the license permits it). There should be a way in fontconfig for font distributors to patch in via a config file the locl characteristics of a font. -- 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 3

[Bug 22338] New: Make fc-query warn about non-WWS compliant fonts
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 20 Aug '18

20 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22338 Summary: Make fc-query warn about non-WWS compliant fonts Product: fontconfig Version: 2.6 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: library AssignedTo: freedesktop(a)behdad.org ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: keithp(a)keithp.com CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com (it would be nice if there was a fc-query component in fontconfig BTW) Since MS' WWS naming model makes stuff simpler for application authors, and will be required in new window code, it would be mighty nice if fc-query warned in its general report if a font file didn't respect this model. Respecting the WWS model is declaring fields 21 and 22 or 16 in 17 in ways that respect WWS (only weight, width and slant in sytles) This way we can point FLOSS authors to fc-query as linting tools and promote font naming our apps can handle easily -- 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 6

[Bug 18727] New: RFE: allow use of iso 15924 codes
by bugzilla-daemon＠freedesktop.org 20 Aug '18

20 Aug '18

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18727 Summary: RFE: allow use of iso 15924 codes Product: fontconfig Version: 2.6 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: library AssignedTo: keithp(a)keithp.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com There are a lot of scripts in the wild and the most accurate standard way to specify them is using iso 15924 codes http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-codes.html Please make it possible to write font patterns using iso 15924 codes in fonts.conf -- 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 3

[Bug 1271792] New: repo-font-audit invalid option errors
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271792 Bug ID: 1271792 Summary: repo-font-audit invalid option errors Product: Fedora Version: 23 Component: fontpackages Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: kvolny(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, tagoh(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Following https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#2.a the step with repo-font-audit doesn't work for me as the tool reports many "invalid option" errors for coreutils programs it obviously tries to use. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fontpackages-tools-1.44-14.fc23.noarch How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 0. # dnf install fontpackages-tools createrepo rpm-build ... whatever needed 1. cd ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS 2. wget https://kvolny.fedorapeople.org/comic-neue-fonts-2.2-1.fc23.src.rpm 3. rpmbuild --rebuild comic-neue-fonts-2.2-1.fc23.src.rpm 4. cd ../RPMS/noarch 5. mkdir /tmp/testrepo 6. mv comic*rpm /tmp/testrepo 7. createrepo /tmp/testrepo 8. repo-font-audit testrepo file:///tmp/testrepo Actual results: Looking for packages: — with font metadata… Error: 'Package' object has no attribute 'packagesize' — that include files with common font extensions… — that use the core X11 protocol… Inspecting packages: – -. ◔mkdir: invalid option -- '.' Try 'mkdir --help' for more information. /bin/repo-font-audit: line 388: cd: -.: invalid option cd: usage: cd [-L|[-P [-e]] [-@]] [dir] curl: (3) [globbing] bad range specification in column 90 ◑rpm2cpio: *.rpm: No such file or directory ◕cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. cpio: premature end of archive cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. touch: invalid option -- '.' Try 'touch --help' for more information. cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. cpio: premature end of archive rm: invalid option -- '.' Try 'rm ./-..cpio' to remove the file '-..cpio'. Try 'rm --help' for more information. ● sed: invalid option -- '.' Usage: sed [OPTION]... {script-only-if-no-other-script} [input-file]... -n, --quiet, --silent suppress automatic printing of pattern space -e script, --expression=script add the script to the commands to be executed -f script-file, --file=script-file add the contents of script-file to the commands to be executed --follow-symlinks follow symlinks when processing in place -i[SUFFIX], --in-place[=SUFFIX] edit files in place (makes backup if SUFFIX supplied) -c, --copy use copy instead of rename when shuffling files in -i mode -b, --binary does nothing; for compatibility with WIN32/CYGWIN/MSDOS/EMX ( open files in binary mode (CR+LFs are not treated specially)) -l N, --line-length=N specify the desired line-wrap length for the `l' command --posix disable all GNU extensions. -r, --regexp-extended use extended regular expressions in the script. -s, --separate consider files as separate rather than as a single continuous long stream. -u, --unbuffered load minimal amounts of data from the input files and flush the output buffers more often -z, --null-data separate lines by NUL characters --help display this help and exit --version output version information and exit If no -e, --expression, -f, or --file option is given, then the first non-option argument is taken as the sed script to interpret. All remaining arguments are names of input files; if no input files are specified, then the standard input is read. GNU sed home page: <http://www.gnu.org/software/sed/>. General help using GNU software: <http://www.gnu.org/gethelp/>. sed: invalid option -- '.' Usage: sed [OPTION]... {script-only-if-no-other-script} [input-file]... -n, --quiet, --silent suppress automatic printing of pattern space -e script, --expression=script add the script to the commands to be executed -f script-file, --file=script-file add the contents of script-file to the commands to be executed --follow-symlinks follow symlinks when processing in place -i[SUFFIX], --in-place[=SUFFIX] edit files in place (makes backup if SUFFIX supplied) -c, --copy use copy instead of rename when shuffling files in -i mode -b, --binary does nothing; for compatibility with WIN32/CYGWIN/MSDOS/EMX ( open files in binary mode (CR+LFs are not treated specially)) -l N, --line-length=N specify the desired line-wrap length for the `l' command --posix disable all GNU extensions. -r, --regexp-extended use extended regular expressions in the script. -s, --separate consider files as separate rather than as a single continuous long stream. -u, --unbuffered load minimal amounts of data from the input files and flush the output buffers more often -z, --null-data separate lines by NUL characters --help display this help and exit --version output version information and exit If no -e, --expression, -f, or --file option is given, then the first non-option argument is taken as the sed script to interpret. All remaining arguments are names of input files; if no input files are specified, then the standard input is read. GNU sed home page: <http://www.gnu.org/software/sed/>. General help using GNU software: <http://www.gnu.org/gethelp/>. – -. ◔mkdir: invalid option -- '.' Try 'mkdir --help' for more information. /bin/repo-font-audit: line 388: cd: -.: invalid option cd: usage: cd [-L|[-P [-e]] [-@]] [dir] curl: (3) [globbing] bad range specification in column 90 ◑rpm2cpio: *.rpm: No such file or directory ◕cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. cpio: premature end of archive cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. touch: invalid option -- '.' Try 'touch --help' for more information. cat: invalid option -- '.' Try 'cat --help' for more information. cpio: premature end of archive rm: invalid option -- '.' Try 'rm ./-..cpio' to remove the file '-..cpio'. Try 'rm --help' for more information. ● sed: invalid option -- '.' Usage: sed [OPTION]... {script-only-if-no-other-script} [input-file]... -n, --quiet, --silent suppress automatic printing of pattern space -e script, --expression=script add the script to the commands to be executed -f script-file, --file=script-file add the contents of script-file to the commands to be executed --follow-symlinks follow symlinks when processing in place -i[SUFFIX], --in-place[=SUFFIX] edit files in place (makes backup if SUFFIX supplied) -c, --copy use copy instead of rename when shuffling files in -i mode -b, --binary does nothing; for compatibility with WIN32/CYGWIN/MSDOS/EMX ( open files in binary mode (CR+LFs are not treated specially)) -l N, --line-length=N specify the desired line-wrap length for the `l' command --posix disable all GNU extensions. -r, --regexp-extended use extended regular expressions in the script. -s, --separate consider files as separate rather than as a single continuous long stream. -u, --unbuffered load minimal amounts of data from the input files and flush the output buffers more often -z, --null-data separate lines by NUL characters --help display this help and exit --version output version information and exit If no -e, --expression, -f, or --file option is given, then the first non-option argument is taken as the sed script to interpret. All remaining arguments are names of input files; if no input files are specified, then the standard input is read. GNU sed home page: <http://www.gnu.org/software/sed/>. General help using GNU software: <http://www.gnu.org/gethelp/>. sed: invalid option -- '.' Usage: sed [OPTION]... {script-only-if-no-other-script} [input-file]... -n, --quiet, --silent suppress automatic printing of pattern space -e script, --expression=script add the script to the commands to be executed -f script-file, --file=script-file add the contents of script-file to the commands to be executed --follow-symlinks follow symlinks when processing in place -i[SUFFIX], --in-place[=SUFFIX] edit files in place (makes backup if SUFFIX supplied) -c, --copy use copy instead of rename when shuffling files in -i mode -b, --binary does nothing; for compatibility with WIN32/CYGWIN/MSDOS/EMX ( open files in binary mode (CR+LFs are not treated specially)) -l N, --line-length=N specify the desired line-wrap length for the `l' command --posix disable all GNU extensions. -r, --regexp-extended use extended regular expressions in the script. -s, --separate consider files as separate rather than as a single continuous long stream. -u, --unbuffered load minimal amounts of data from the input files and flush the output buffers more often -z, --null-data separate lines by NUL characters --help display this help and exit --version output version information and exit If no -e, --expression, -f, or --file option is given, then the first non-option argument is taken as the sed script to interpret. All remaining arguments are names of input files; if no input files are specified, then the standard input is read. GNU sed home page: <http://www.gnu.org/software/sed/>. General help using GNU software: <http://www.gnu.org/gethelp/>. Analysing files… ♻ Consolidating data… Conducting tests: — Error: fonts deployed outside /usr/share/fonts ⇒ None! — Error: fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ⇒ None! — Error: packages that mix different font families ⇒ None! — Error: exact font duplication ⇒ None! — Error: font faces duplicated by different packages ⇒ None! — Error: fonts fc-query can not parse ⇒ None! — Error: fonts not identified as such by libmagic ⇒ None! — Error: broken symlinks to font files ⇒ None! — Error: rpmlint ⇒ None! — Error: fonts in packages that contain non-font data ⇒ None! — Error: fonts in arch packages ⇒ None! — Warning: fonts in packages that do not respect font naming conventions ⇒ None! — Warning: bad font naming ⇒ None! — Warning: core fonts use ⇒ None! — Warning: font linking ⇒ None! — Warning: font faces duplicated within a package ⇒ None! — Warning: fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ⇒ None! — Warning: fonts with localized metadata but no English variant ⇒ None! — Suggestion: fonts with partial script coverage ⇒ None! — Suggestion: fonts with partial unicode block coverage ⇒ None! Audit results: – packages that declare font metadata: ⇒ None! ☛ File size is computed as extracted, while rpm is a compressed format. ☛ Mid-term, files in legacy PCF or Type1 formats need to be converted or removed. – font files in other packages (we should not find any!) ⇒ None! – errors, warnings and suggestions: ⇒ None! Packing mail data… Packing result data… Audit complete! Run time: 9 s. Number of items processed: ⇒ None! 1. Extracted data: /home/kvolny/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/repo-font-audit-testrepo-20151014T175728Z.tar.xz 2. Short summary: /home/kvolny/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/repo-font-audit-testrepo-20151014T175728Z-short.tar.xz 3. Mail data: /home/kvolny/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/repo-font-audit-testrepo-20151014T175728Z-mail.tar.xz This report was generated by the repo-font-audit command from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages Please post questions, suggestions, patches or bug reports to: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts (subscription required) ♻ Expected results: (no such errors) Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5nIiUgzabR&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 8

[Bug 1376999] New: comic-neue-fonts-2.3 is available
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376999 Bug ID: 1376999 Summary: comic-neue-fonts-2.3 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: comic-neue-fonts Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: kvolny(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kvolny(a)redhat.com Latest upstream release: 2.3 Current version/release in rawhide: 2.2-3.fc24 URL: http://comicneue.com/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/8250/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 6

[Bug 825115] New: [kn_IN] Lohit Kannada glyphs of consonants with vowel signs -II, -EE, -OO and -AI should be optimized
by Red Hat Bugzilla 23 Jul '18

23 Jul '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825115 Bug ID: 825115 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: 16 Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [kn_IN] Lohit Kannada glyphs of consonants with vowel signs -II, -EE, -OO and -AI should be optimized Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-kannada-fonts Product: Fedora Description of problem: Currently the Lohit Kannada fonts unnecessarily contain separate glyphs for consonants with vowel signs -II, -EE, -OO and -AI. These are merely sequences of other glyphs. In the case of -II, -EE, -OO the glyphs are the same as those of the corresponding short vowels plus a separate glyph 0CD5 Kannada Length Mark ೕ (unlike in Telugu where the length mark ligates with the syllable). Therefore instead of doing substitutions of: CONSONANT + VOWEL_SIGN_II/EE/OO --> CONSONANT_VOWELSIGN_II/EE/OO the optimized way would be to do: CONSONANT + VOWEL_SIGN_II/EE/OO --> CONSONANT_VOWELSIGN_I/E/O LENGTH_MARK If this is done, any changes that are reflected on the CONSONANT_VOWELSIGN_I/E/O glyphs would automatically reflect for the long vowels as well without additional work being needed. For instance, see my recent report of bug 825104. If that bug is fixed for short vowels I, E and O, automatically it would reflect for II, EE and OO also. As for -AI, it is merely sequence of glyph for -E plus 0CD6 Kannada AI Length Mark ೖ. So instead of doing substitutions of: CONSONANT + VOWEL_SIGN_AI --> CONSONANT_VOWELSIGN_AI the optimized way would be to do: CONSONANT + VOWEL_SIGN_AI --> CONSONANT_VOWELSIGN_E AI_LENGTH_MARK with same benefits as above. Further, when handling combinations of: CONSONANT1 + VIRAMA + CONSONANT2 + VOWEL_SIGN_II/EE/OO/AU by separating the length mark as recommended here, the sub-base form of CONSONANT2 can be placed closer to the base CONSONANT1 which is also typographically a desirable factor in a good font. The rules would be: CONSONANT1 + VIRAMA + CONSONANT2 + VOWEL_SIGN_II/EE/OO/AU --> CONSONANT1_VOWEL_SIGN_I/E/O + SUB_BASE_CONSONANT_2 + (AI_)LENGTH_MARK Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.5.1 How reproducible: Examine the internals of Lohit Kannada font. Actual results: Currently there are separate glyphs for consonants with vowel signs -II, -EE, -OO and -AI unnecessarily. These are merely sequences of other glyphs. Therefore any change effected on the component glyphs has to be re-done here. Expected results: The superfluous glyphs should be removed and the appropriate effect should be achieved by appropriate smartfont rules as indicated above. Additional info: This would also reduce the size of the font. Not an issue on laptops/desktops but nowadays Lohit fonts are finding their way into smaller screens such as smartphones, and it would be good to have a trim font with small footprint. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 7

[Bug 500110] New: [hi_IN][Dependent Vowels]Press backspace key it delete the whole char and letter before it
by Red Hat Bugzilla 19 Jul '18

19 Jul '18

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [hi_IN][Dependent Vowels]Press backspace key it delete the whole char and letter before it https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=500110 Summary: [hi_IN][Dependent Vowels]Press backspace key it delete the whole char and letter before it Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: i386 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: pango AssignedTo: besfahbo(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: kxiong(a)redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: In gedit press Backspace key to delete the whole char,it delete both the whole char and the letter before it Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): pango-devel-1.22.1-1.fc10.i386 pango-1.22.1-1.fc10.i386 pangomm-2.14.0-2.fc10.i386 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1.In gedit input dabenा 2.Press Backspace key to delete the whole char ा Actual results: It delete the whole char and the letter n when pressing the Backspace key. Expected results: It should only delete the whole char. Additional info: 1. U+093E ा 2. U+093F ि 3. U+0940 ी 4. U+0941 ु 5. U+0942 ू 6. U+0943 ृ 7. U+0944 ॄ 8. U+0945 ॅ 9. U+0946 ॆ 10. U+0947 े 11. U+0948 ै 12. U+0949 ॉ 13. U+094B ो 14. U+094C ौ in Dependent Vowels all have the same problem -- 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.

2 52

[Bug 525881] New: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data
by Red Hat Bugzilla 13 Jun '18

13 Jun '18

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=525881 Summary: Please rebuild using external Adobe CMap and AGLFN data Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: freetype AssignedTo: besfahbo(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Blocks: 182235,473302 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: The Debian fonttool packager noticed a problem in fonttool's embedded Adobe CMap and AGLFN data and got Adobe to release them under a good license This data is embeded in many packages, including yours Please rebuild your package using an external shared Adobe CMap and AGLFN data package FE-LEGAL since this was all triggered by a legal check Debian-side See also http://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/log/2009/09/24/adobe-data-freed/ http://lwn.net/Articles/354360/ http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/cmap/CMap+Resources -- 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.

2 9

[Bug 1332250] New: Incorrect font configuration
by Red Hat Bugzilla 13 Jun '18

13 Jun '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1332250 Bug ID: 1332250 Summary: Incorrect font configuration Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: open-sans-fonts Assignee: pvoborni(a)redhat.com Reporter: dag.odenhall(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pvoborni(a)redhat.com When a website requests Open Sans, Firefox uses Comfortaa. I have both fonts installed. I don't know if the following is the cause, because the matching works correctly with fc-match, but I discovered this and it's still wrong, I think. The open-sans-fonts package includes this fontconfig rule: <alias> <family>Open Sans</family> <prefer> <family>sans-serif</family> </prefer> </alias> In my understanding of fontconfig, this is saying "Edit the font family list for Open Sans and prepend the sans-serif font family" i.e. Open Sans itself is given *less* priority than all other sans-serif fonts. The aajohan-comfortaa-fonts package includes this (correct) rule: <alias> <family>sans-serif</family> <prefer> <family>Comfortaa</family> </prefer> </alias> And so perhaps C being early in the alphabet or perhaps because being the next fontconfig file in my conf.d (I don't fully understand fontconfig) the combined effect ends up being "When looking for Open Sans, the first match is sans-serif which in turn is Comfortaa". I think the Open Sans rule above should be edited to something closer to the Comfortaa rule above, like: <alias> <family>sans-serif</family> <prefer> <family>Open Sans</family> </prefer> </alias> The second rule it contains is also wrong, I think, and not like how any other fonts are configured: <alias> <family>sans-serif</family> <default> <family>Open Sans</family> </default> </alias> Should probably also swap the families like so: <alias> <family>Open Sans</family> <default> <family>sans-serif</family> </default> </alias> This Firefox bug seems relevant but I think this is a bug in the packaged font configuration and really unrelated to Firefox (I didn't read the whole bug): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1245811 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 19

[Bug 1321551] New: RFE: Recommend some specific general purpose font
by Red Hat Bugzilla 07 Jun '18

07 Jun '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321551 Bug ID: 1321551 Summary: RFE: Recommend some specific general purpose font Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: fontconfig Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: ville.skytta(a)iki.fi QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Currently fontconfig has a dependency on font(:lang=en). For minimal setups where fontconfig is involved in that don't specify anything more specific than that, it results in getting the first satisfying package by alphabetical sort order to be installed. At the moment that is aajohan-comfortaa-fonts, which is not a very good default, and could change based on what names of packages are available. Instead, I suggest adding (in addition to the existing hard dependency on font(:lang=en)) a Recommends that would by default (with dnf) pull in something that is a better default and already a default in common Fedora installations, such as abattis-cantarell-fonts which AFAIK is the default for GNOME. Some other potential candidates would be liberation-sans-fonts and dejavu-sans-fonts. Not sure if Suggests would work for this purpose, or if it needs to be Recommends. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 2

[Bug 1444911] New: CVE-2017-7864 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the tt_size_reset function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1444911 Bug ID: 1444911 Summary: CVE-2017-7864 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the tt_size_reset function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: amaris(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com FreeType 2 before 2017-02-02 has an out-of-bounds write caused by a heap-based buffer overflow related to the tt_size_reset function in truetype/ttobjs.c. Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=509 Upstream patch: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=e669959… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1429965] New: CVE-2016-10244 freetype: parse_charstrings function in type1/ t1load.c does not ensure that a font contains a glyph name
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1429965 Bug ID: 1429965 Summary: CVE-2016-10244 freetype: parse_charstrings function in type1/t1load.c does not ensure that a font contains a glyph name Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com The parse_charstrings function in type1/t1load.c in FreeType 2 does not ensure that a font contains a glyph name, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap-based buffer over-read) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted file. References: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=36 Upstream patch: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/src/type1/t1… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1444904] New: CVE-2017-7858 freetype: out-of-bounds write related to the TT_Get_MM_Var and sfnt_init_face functions
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1444904 Bug ID: 1444904 Summary: CVE-2017-7858 freetype: out-of-bounds write related to the TT_Get_MM_Var and sfnt_init_face functions Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: amaris(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com FreeType 2 before 2017-03-07 has an out-of-bounds write related to the TT_Get_MM_Var function in truetype/ttgxvar.c and the sfnt_init_face function in sfnt/sfobjs.c. Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=738 Upstream patch: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=7793097… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1444898] New: CVE-2017-7857 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the TT_Get_MM_Var function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1444898 Bug ID: 1444898 Summary: CVE-2017-7857 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the TT_Get_MM_Var function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: amaris(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com FreeType 2 before 2017-03-08 has an out-of-bounds write caused by a heap-based buffer overflow related to the TT_Get_MM_Var function in truetype/ttgxvar.c and the sfnt_init_face function in sfnt/sfobjs.c. Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=759 Upstream patch: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=7bbb91f… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1444895] New: CVE-2016-10328 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the cff_parser_run function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1444895 Bug ID: 1444895 Summary: CVE-2016-10328 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the cff_parser_run function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: amaris(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com FreeType 2 before 2016-12-16 has an out-of-bounds write caused by a heap-based buffer overflow related to the cff_parser_run function in cff/cffparse.c. Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=289 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1446500] New: CVE-2017-8105 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_decoder_parse_charstrings
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 May '18

31 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1446500 Bug ID: 1446500 Summary: CVE-2017-8105 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_decoder_parse_charstrings Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: amaris(a)redhat.com CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, bmcclain(a)redhat.com, cfergeau(a)redhat.com, dblechte(a)redhat.com, eedri(a)redhat.com, erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl, fedora-mingw(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gklein(a)redhat.com, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, lsurette(a)redhat.com, mgoldboi(a)redhat.com, michal.skrivanek(a)redhat.com, mkasik(a)redhat.com, rbalakri(a)redhat.com, rh-spice-bugs(a)redhat.com, rjones(a)redhat.com, sherold(a)redhat.com, srevivo(a)redhat.com, ydary(a)redhat.com, ykaul(a)redhat.com FreeType 2 before 2017-03-24 has an out-of-bounds write caused by a heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_decoder_parse_charstrings function in psaux/t1decode.c. Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=935 Upstream patch: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=f958c48… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 7

[Bug 1423225] New: apanov-edrip-fonts: FTBFS in rawhide
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 29 May '18

29 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423225 Bug ID: 1423225 Summary: apanov-edrip-fonts: FTBFS in rawhide Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: apanov-edrip-fonts Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: releng(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 Blocks: 1423041 Your package apanov-edrip-fonts failed to build from source in current rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17710156 For details on mass rebuild see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_26_Mass_Rebuild Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1423041 [Bug 1423041] Fedora 26 Mass Rebuild FTBFS Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 5

[Bug 1271620] New: please update spec templates as per latest guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 29 May '18

29 May '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1271620 Bug ID: 1271620 Summary: please update spec templates as per latest guidelines Product: Fedora Version: 23 Component: fontpackages Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: kvolny(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, tagoh(a)redhat.com Description of problem: I'm trying to package a font. While filing the spec template, I have found that there is: %install rm -fr %{buildroot} but the buildroot is now cleaned automatically so the `rm` command should not be present. Please update the spec templates according to the latest guidelines. Also note that there may be other deviations from current packaging guidelines that I have overlooked ... Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fontpackages-devel-1.44-14.fc23.noarch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=162cGuTqJk&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 5

[Bug 1400602] New: stix-fonts-2.0.0 is available
by Red Hat Bugzilla 29 Apr '18

29 Apr '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1400602 Bug ID: 1400602 Summary: stix-fonts-2.0.0 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: stix-fonts Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(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 Latest upstream release: 2.0.0 Current version/release in rawhide: 1.1.0-9.fc24 URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stixfonts Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/4893/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 6

[Bug 1474257] New: fc-cache in multilib does not create 32bit cache files
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 18 Apr '18

18 Apr '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474257 Bug ID: 1474257 Summary: fc-cache in multilib does not create 32bit cache files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: fontconfig Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: tagoh(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Blocks: 1468978 Description of problem: On 64bit env, there are no way to generate {be,le}32d{4,8} caches unless removing 64bit version of packages because the 32bit version of fc-cache binary is hidden by the package manager. need to have separate binary to address like gtk does. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1468978 [Bug 1468978] fc-cache in multilib does not create 32bit cache files -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 2

[Bug 1450802] New: @sinhala-suppport group: please change the default font from LKLUG to Noto
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Apr '18

15 Apr '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450802 Bug ID: 1450802 Summary: @sinhala-suppport group: please change the default font from LKLUG to Noto Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: google-noto-fonts Severity: low Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: harshula(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com [This BZ should be filed against the @sinhala-support group.] Description of problem: Please change the default font from LKLUG to Noto for the Sinhala script. The LKLUG font is viewed as deprecated and we've been trying to encourage other fonts that can succeed as the default Sinhala font on GNU/Linux. At this stage the Noto Sinhala range, in fonts-noto-hinted, is a more appropriate default font than LKLUG. See the discussion here: http://sourceforge.net/p/sinhala/mailman/message/34481529/ See Debian Bug: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=837969 Thanks, # -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 18

[Bug 1485789] New: bogus permissions on /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 13 Mar '18

13 Mar '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485789 Bug ID: 1485789 Summary: bogus permissions on /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: urw-fonts Assignee: dkaspar(a)redhat.com Reporter: rc040203(a)freenet.de QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: dkaspar(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, than(a)redhat.com Description of problem: The urw-fonts package's permission on /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts are set read-only: $ rpm -qlv urw-fonts | grep doc drw-r--r-- 2 root root 0 Feb 12 2017 /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17992 Apr 23 2001 /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts/COPYING -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2245 Jan 18 2002 /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts/README -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1317 Jul 12 2002 /usr/share/doc/urw-fonts/README.tweaks Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): urw-fonts-2.4-23.fc26.noarch -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 13

[Bug 1504381] New: libXfont-1.5.3 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 06 Mar '18

06 Mar '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1504381 Bug ID: 1504381 Summary: libXfont-1.5.3 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: libXfont Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: btissoir(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, alexl(a)redhat.com, btissoir(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, caolanm(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, jglisse(a)redhat.com, john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mbarnes(a)fastmail.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com Latest upstream release: 1.5.3 Current version/release in rawhide: 1.5.2-5.fc28 URL: http://xorg.freedesktop.org/archive/individual/lib/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/1776/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 1500693] New: CVE-2017-13722 libXfont: Insufficient input validation in pcfread.c
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 26 Feb '18

26 Feb '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1500693 Bug ID: 1500693 Summary: CVE-2017-13722 libXfont: Insufficient input validation in pcfread.c Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, alexl(a)redhat.com, btissoir(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, caolanm(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, jglisse(a)redhat.com, john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mbarnes(a)fastmail.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com It was discovered that libXfont incorrectly handled certain malformed PCF files. A local attacker could use this issue to cause libXfont to crash, resulting in a denial of service, or possibly obtain sensitive information. Upstream patch: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libXfont/commit/?id=672bb944311392e24… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1500690] New: CVE-2017-13720 libXfont: Insufficient input validation in fontdir.c
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 26 Feb '18

26 Feb '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1500690 Bug ID: 1500690 Summary: CVE-2017-13720 libXfont: Insufficient input validation in fontdir.c Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, alexl(a)redhat.com, btissoir(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, caolanm(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, jglisse(a)redhat.com, john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mbarnes(a)fastmail.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com It was discovered that libXfont incorrectly handled certain patterns in PatternMatch. A local attacker could use this issue to cause libXfont to crash, resulting in a denial of service, or possibly obtain sensitive information. Upstream patch: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libXfont/commit/?id=d1e670a4a8704b870… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 499358] New: [as_IN] [Codepoint- Additional Vowels] U+09E2 has error.
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Feb '18

02 Feb '18

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [as_IN] [Codepoint- Additional Vowels] U+09E2 has error. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499358 Summary: [as_IN] [Codepoint- Additional Vowels] U+09E2 has error. Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: pango AssignedTo: besfahbo(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: xinsun(a)redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: Input "09E2" with "RAW CODE" in gedit, the word has error. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): pangomm-2.14.1-1.fc10.x86_64 pango-1.22.3-1.fc10.i386 pango-1.22.3-1.fc10.x86_64 pango-devel-1.22.3-1.fc10.x86_64 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.Select "RAW CODE" in scim-bridge. 2.Input "09E2" in gedit. Actual results: The result is ৢ and is different from the URL http://batman.bne.redhat.com/~indic/IndicTC/lang/as_IN/font/image/09E2.jpg Expected results: The word is same with the URL http://batman.bne.redhat.com/~indic/IndicTC/lang/as_IN/font/image/09E2.jpg 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.

2 7

[Bug 1475398] New: CVE-2017-11568 CVE-2017-11569 CVE-2017-11570 CVE-2017-11571 CVE-2017-11572 CVE-2017-11573 CVE-2017-11574 CVE-2017-11575 CVE-2017-11576 CVE-2017-11577 fontforge : various flaws [fedora-all]
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475398 Bug ID: 1475398 Summary: CVE-2017-11568 CVE-2017-11569 CVE-2017-11570 CVE-2017-11571 CVE-2017-11572 CVE-2017-11573 CVE-2017-11574 CVE-2017-11575 CVE-2017-11576 CVE-2017-11577 fontforge: various flaws [fedora-all] Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: fontforge Keywords: Security, SecurityTracking Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: kevin(a)scrye.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com This is an automatically created tracking bug! It was created to ensure that one or more security vulnerabilities are fixed in affected versions of fedora-all. For comments that are specific to the vulnerability please use bugs filed against the "Security Response" product referenced in the "Blocks" field. For more information see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/TrackingBugs When submitting as an update, use the fedpkg template provided in the next comment(s). This will include the bug IDs of this tracking bug as well as the relevant top-level CVE bugs. Please also mention the CVE IDs being fixed in the RPM changelog and the fedpkg commit message. NOTE: this issue affects multiple supported versions of Fedora. While only one tracking bug has been filed, please correct all affected versions at the same time. If you need to fix the versions independent of each other, you may clone this bug as appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 13

[Bug 1475397] New: CVE-2017-11577 fontforge: Buffer over-read in getsid function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475397 Bug ID: 1475397 Summary: CVE-2017-11577 fontforge: Buffer over-read in getsid function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a buffer over-read in getsid (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS or via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3088 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475396] New: CVE-2017-11576 fontforge: Does not ensure a positive size in a weight vector memcpy call in readcfftopdict function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475396 Bug ID: 1475396 Summary: CVE-2017-11576 fontforge: Does not ensure a positive size in a weight vector memcpy call in readcfftopdict function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 does not ensure a positive size in a weight vector memcpy call in readcfftopdict (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3091 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475393] New: CVE-2017-11575 fontforge: Buffer over-read in strnmatch function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475393 Bug ID: 1475393 Summary: CVE-2017-11575 fontforge: Buffer over-read in strnmatch function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a buffer over-read in strnmatch (char.c) resulting in DoS or via a crafted otf file, related to a call from the readttfcopyrights function in parsettf.c. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3096 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475392] New: CVE-2017-11574 fontforge: Heap-based buffer overflow in readcffset function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475392 Bug ID: 1475392 Summary: CVE-2017-11574 fontforge: Heap-based buffer overflow in readcffset function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a heap-based buffer overflow in readcffset (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3090 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475391] New: CVE-2017-11573 fontforge: Buffer over-read in ValidatePostScriptFontName function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475391 Bug ID: 1475391 Summary: CVE-2017-11573 fontforge: Buffer over-read in ValidatePostScriptFontName function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a buffer over-read in ValidatePostScriptFontName (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3098 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1475390] New: CVE-2017-11572 fontforge: Heap-based buffer over-read in readcfftopidcts function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475390 Bug ID: 1475390 Summary: CVE-2017-11572 fontforge: Heap-based buffer over-read in readcfftopidcts function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a heap-based buffer over-read in readcfftopdicts (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3092 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475389] New: CVE-2017-11571 fontforge: Stack-buffer overflow in addnibble function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475389 Bug ID: 1475389 Summary: CVE-2017-11571 fontforge: Stack-buffer overflow in addnibble function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a stack-based buffer overflow in addnibble (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3087 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1475388] New: CVE-2017-11570 fontforge: Buffer over-read in umodenc function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475388 Bug ID: 1475388 Summary: CVE-2017-11570 fontforge: Buffer over-read in umodenc function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a buffer over-read in umodenc (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS or via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3097 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 3

[Bug 1475386] New: CVE-2017-11569 fontforge: Heap-buffer over-read in readttfcopyrights function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Jan '18

14 Jan '18

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1475386 Bug ID: 1475386 Summary: CVE-2017-11569 fontforge: Heap-buffer over-read in readttfcopyrights function Product: Security Response Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com FontForge 20161012 is vulnerable to a heap-based buffer over-read in readttfcopyrights (parsettf.c) resulting in DoS via a crafted otf file. Upstream issue: https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/issues/3093 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1433628] New: First line of pixels chopped off in Chromium/ Chrome when liberation-fonts built with fontforge > 20150430
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Dec '17

28 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1433628 Bug ID: 1433628 Summary: First line of pixels chopped off in Chromium/Chrome when liberation-fonts built with fontforge > 20150430 Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: chillermillerlong(a)hotmail.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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: The current liberation-fonts package is built by fontforge 20160404 and results in the top of the fonts being chopped off in some pages in Chrome/Chromium. For example, with this page: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/600h4f/wine_24_released/ When built with fontforge 20160404: http://i.imgur.com/kO2H3Hw.png When built with fontforge 20150430: http://i.imgur.com/IQmu5o3.png Notice how the first line of pixels is getting chopped off. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): liberation-fonts-common-1.07.4-7.fc24.noarch liberation-mono-fonts-1.07.4-7.fc24.noarch liberation-sans-fonts-1.07.4-7.fc24.noarch liberation-serif-fonts-1.07.4-7.fc24.noarch fontforge-20160404-5.fc25.x86_64 Additional info: I did a git bisect and found that this is the commit in fontforge that introduced the issue. --- [chenxiaolong@cxl-fedora25vm fontforge]$ git bisect bad e870019c2602d50eb00793e979f3e11bcc71d6cf is the first bad commit commit e870019c2602d50eb00793e979f3e11bcc71d6cf Author: Frédéric Wang <fred.wang(a)free.fr> Date: Wed May 13 08:03:13 2015 +0200 Fix read/write of bits USE_TYPO_METRICS and WWS for OS2 version < 4 :040000 040000 7032ea971c1d084ab8a038b4a80d9092e53a8519 eb11e4b5a69718ad94d8dbfc414e7b2a944548d3 M fontforge --- https://github.com/fontforge/fontforge/commit/e870019c2602d50eb00793e979f3e… Is this something that can be fixed without affecting/breaking other fonts? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 13

[Bug 1414319] New: freetype ftoption.h evaluates undefined macros
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414319 Bug ID: 1414319 Summary: freetype ftoption.h evaluates undefined macros Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: freetype Severity: low Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: yeti(a)physics.muni.cz QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, mkasik(a)redhat.com Description of problem: Header file /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftoption.h evaluates the numerical value of undefined macro TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING. This is somewhat annoying with -Wundef (and a poor practice). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): freetype-2.6.5-1.fc25 How reproducible: Always. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create file bug.c with the following contents: #include <ft2build.h> #include FT_FREETYPE_H 2. Run (with freetype-devel installed) gcc -Wundef -c $(pkg-config --cflags freetype2) bug.c Actual results: In file included from /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftconfig-64.h:42:0, from /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftconfig.h:9, from /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/freetype.h:33, from bug.c:2: /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftoption.h:845:5: warning: "TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING" is not defined [-Wundef] #if TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING & 1 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftoption.h:849:5: warning: "TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING" is not defined [-Wundef] #if TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING & 2 ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Expected results: It compiles cleanly. Additional info: The numerical evaluation should be guarded by an #ifdef -- AFAICT the expected behaviour when TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING is undefined is that neither TT_SUPPORT_SUBPIXEL_HINTING_INFINALITY nor TT_SUPPORT_SUBPIXEL_HINTING_MINIMAL should be defined: --- ftoption.h.orig 2017-01-18 10:41:32.517812687 +0100 +++ ftoption.h 2017-01-18 10:42:16.852136325 +0100 @@ -842,6 +842,7 @@ #ifdef TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER #define TT_USE_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER +#ifdef TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING #if TT_CONFIG_OPTION_SUBPIXEL_HINTING & 1 #define TT_SUPPORT_SUBPIXEL_HINTING_INFINALITY #endif @@ -850,6 +851,7 @@ #define TT_SUPPORT_SUBPIXEL_HINTING_MINIMAL #endif #endif +#endif /* -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 2

[Bug 1387607] New: [abrt] fontforge: AddEdge(): fontforge killed by SIGSEGV
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1387607 Bug ID: 1387607 Summary: [abrt] fontforge: AddEdge(): fontforge killed by SIGSEGV Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: fontforge Assignee: kevin(a)scrye.com Reporter: mael.lavault(a)mailz.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, pnemade(a)redhat.com Version-Release number of selected component: fontforge-20160404-4.fc25 Additional info: reporter: libreport-2.8.0 backtrace_rating: 4 cmdline: fontforge /home/mlavault/Development/galaxy/public/fonts/webfont.svg crash_function: AddEdge executable: /usr/bin/fontforge global_pid: 15965 kernel: 4.8.2-300.fc25.x86_64 pkg_fingerprint: 4089 D8F2 FDB1 9C98 pkg_vendor: Fedora Project runlevel: N 5 type: CCpp uid: 1000 Truncated backtrace: Thread no. 1 (10 frames) #0 AddEdge at splinefill.c:248 #1 AddSpline at splinefill.c:376 #2 FindEdgesSplineSet at splinefill.c:403 #3 FindEdges at splinefill.c:420 #4 _SplineCharRasterize at splinefill.c:1397 #5 SplineCharAntiAlias at splinefill.c:1586 #6 BDFCharFromLayer at cvpalettes.c:1347 #7 CVLayers1Set at cvpalettes.c:1931 #8 CVLayersSet at cvpalettes.c:1965 #9 _CVPaletteActivate at cvpalettes.c:3540 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 4

[Bug 1389683] New: Blurred rendering
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1389683 Bug ID: 1389683 Summary: Blurred rendering Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: freetype Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: fedora(a)famillecollet.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, mkasik(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1214870 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1214870&action=edit Zoomed screen shot Description of problem: Since update to F25, font are blurred. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): freetype-2.6.5-1.fc25.x86_64 How reproducible: Always Notice: with F24, I solved the problem switching from Cantarell to Liberation, but no success on F25. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 24

[Bug 1394198] New: In F25 Helvetica is substituted by TeX Gyre Heros which looks bad in greek
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1394198 Bug ID: 1394198 Summary: In F25 Helvetica is substituted by TeX Gyre Heros which looks bad in greek Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: fontconfig Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: alex.ploumistos(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1219727 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1219727&action=edit Same facebook post in f24 and f25 After upgrading to F25 from F23 I noticed that some pages, e.g. facebook displayed text in a weird-looking font (see attachment). It seems that after the upgrade, fontconfig(?) considers TeX Gyre Heros as a more appropriate Helvetica replacement than Nimbus Sans L. In F25, fc-match Helvetica yields: texgyreheros-regular.otf: "TeX Gyre Heros" "Regular" while in F24: n019003l.pfb: "Nimbus Sans L" "Regular" I am looking at a laptop and a desktop, the first running F24 and the latter F25. They both have n019003l.pfb in /usr/share/fonts/default/Type1/ and I can't find any difference in the rules in /etc/fonts/ nor is there a local file that overrides these settings. The only obvious difference is the line in which each font is grep-ped in 45-latin.conf. In F24: $ grep -Rn 'Nimbus Sans\|TeX Gyre\|Helvetica' /etc/fonts/conf.d/ /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:11:Helvetica Nimbus Sans TeX Gyre Heros /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:12:Helvetica Condensed Nimbus Sans Narrow TeX Gyre Heros Cn /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:13:Times Nimbus Roman TeX Gyre Termes /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:14:Courier Nimbus Mono TeX Gyre Cursor /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:15:ITC Avant Garde Gothic URW Gothic TeX Gyre Adventor /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:16:ITC Bookman Bookman URW TeX Gyre Bonum Bookman Old Style /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:17:ITC Zapf Chancery Chancery URW TeX Gyre Chorus /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:18:Palatino Palladio URW TeX Gyre Pagella Palatino Linotype /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:19:New Century Schoolbook Century SchoolBook URW TeX Gyre Schola Century Schoolbook /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:42: e.g. Arial to Helvetica /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:53: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:55: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:60: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:62: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:67: <family>TeX Gyre Heros</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:69: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:74: <family>Nimbus Sans Narrow</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:76: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:81: <family>TeX Gyre Heros Cn</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:83: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:102: <family>TeX Gyre Termes</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:123: <family>TeX Gyre Cursor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:151: <family>TeX Gyre Adventor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:179: <family>TeX Gyre Bonum</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:214: <family>TeX Gyre Chorus</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:235: <family>TeX Gyre Pagella</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:263: <family>TeX Gyre Schola</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:401: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:408: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:433: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:440: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:464: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:466: <family>TeX Gyre Heros</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:467: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:468: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:473: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:475: <family>TeX Gyre Heros Cn</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:476: <family>Nimbus Sans Narrow</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:483: <family>TeX Gyre Termes</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:492: <family>TeX Gyre Cursor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:501: <family>TeX Gyre Adventor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:511: <family>TeX Gyre Bonum</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:520: <family>TeX Gyre Chorus</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:530: <family>TeX Gyre Pagella</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:540: <family>TeX Gyre Schola</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/65-nonlatin.conf:76: <family>ArmNet Helvetica</family>  /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:84: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:100: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:104: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:26: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:27: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:28: <family>Helvetica</family> and in F25: $ grep -Rn 'Nimbus Sans\|TeX Gyre\|Helvetica' /etc/fonts/conf.d/ /etc/fonts/conf.d/65-nonlatin.conf:76: <family>ArmNet Helvetica</family>  /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:11:Helvetica Nimbus Sans TeX Gyre Heros /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:12:Helvetica Condensed Nimbus Sans Narrow TeX Gyre Heros Cn /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:13:Times Nimbus Roman TeX Gyre Termes /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:14:Courier Nimbus Mono TeX Gyre Cursor /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:15:ITC Avant Garde Gothic URW Gothic TeX Gyre Adventor /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:16:ITC Bookman Bookman URW TeX Gyre Bonum Bookman Old Style /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:17:ITC Zapf Chancery Chancery URW TeX Gyre Chorus /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:18:Palatino Palladio URW TeX Gyre Pagella Palatino Linotype /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:19:New Century Schoolbook Century SchoolBook URW TeX Gyre Schola Century Schoolbook /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:42: e.g. Arial to Helvetica /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:53: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:55: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:60: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:62: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:67: <family>TeX Gyre Heros</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:69: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:74: <family>Nimbus Sans Narrow</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:76: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:81: <family>TeX Gyre Heros Cn</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:83: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:102: <family>TeX Gyre Termes</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:123: <family>TeX Gyre Cursor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:151: <family>TeX Gyre Adventor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:179: <family>TeX Gyre Bonum</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:214: <family>TeX Gyre Chorus</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:235: <family>TeX Gyre Pagella</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:263: <family>TeX Gyre Schola</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:401: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:408: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:433: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:440: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:464: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:466: <family>TeX Gyre Heros</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:467: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:468: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:473: <family>Helvetica Condensed</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:475: <family>TeX Gyre Heros Cn</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:476: <family>Nimbus Sans Narrow</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:483: <family>TeX Gyre Termes</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:492: <family>TeX Gyre Cursor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:501: <family>TeX Gyre Adventor</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:511: <family>TeX Gyre Bonum</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:520: <family>TeX Gyre Chorus</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:530: <family>TeX Gyre Pagella</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/30-metric-aliases.conf:540: <family>TeX Gyre Schola</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:128: <family>Helvetica</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:144: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/45-latin.conf:148: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:26: <family>Nimbus Sans L</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:27: <family>Nimbus Sans</family> /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf:28: <family>Helvetica</family> Is there a setting some place else that I'm overlooking? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 8

[Bug 1351287] New: Wrong placement of polish glyph Ogonek
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1351287 Bug ID: 1351287 Summary: Wrong placement of polish glyph Ogonek Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: riemersebastian(a)hotmail.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, psatpute(a)redhat.com Description of problem: The following text when using font "LiberationSans-Regular" renders the polish Ogonek far to the right which does not seem correct when compared to other fonts. INPUT: "Lektura dla pocza̜tkuja̜cych" Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): version 2.0.0 (Downloaded from https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/liberation-sans) How reproducible: Just use the text "Lektura dla pocza̜tkuja̜cych" and the problem should be visible (and see below) Steps to Reproduce: 1. Go to https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/liberation-sans 2. Go to tab "Test drive" 3. Enter text "Lektura dla pocza̜tkuja̜cych" Actual results: The result shows the Ogonek way to the right and AFAIK it should render centered below the letter 'a'. Expected results: Compare by same steps as above, but e.g. choose as font: Junicode (https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/Junicode) Additional info: None -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 4

[Bug 733106] New: fonts.alias refer to encodings not listed in fonts.dir
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: fonts.alias refer to encodings not listed in fonts.dir https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=733106 Summary: fonts.alias refer to encodings not listed in fonts.dir Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: sazanami-fonts AssignedTo: tagoh(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: viy(a)altlinux.org QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: tagoh(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- fonts.alias files refer to jisx020*.19??-0 font encodings while fonts.dir does not list them. looks like a fonts.scale/fonts.dir generation bug. /usr/share/X11/fonts/encodings/large/* encodings should be present during fonts.scale/fonts.dir generation. sazanami-fonts-0.20040629-15.fc15.src.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.

2 15

[Bug 1359716] New: Please upgrade DejaVu to version 2.36
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359716 Bug ID: 1359716 Summary: Please upgrade DejaVu to version 2.36 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: dejavu-fonts Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: fred.wang(a)free.fr QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, peter(a)thecodergeek.com, smaitra(a)redhat.com Dear Fedora Maintainers, A new version of DejaVu has been released yesterday, please consider upgrading the Fedora package to 2.36: https://sourceforge.net/p/dejavu/mailman/message/35221644/ Note that in particular it includes a new math font. PS: I also sent an email on https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fonts@lists.fedoraproject.org… but without any replies so far. The new fonts are now already in Debian and Ubuntu. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 8

[Bug 825081] New: Lohit Kannada font does not properly handle vowel signs in consonant clusters
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=825081 Bug ID: 825081 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: 16 Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: Lohit Kannada font does not properly handle vowel signs in consonant clusters Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-kannada-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 586752 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=586752&action=edit ODT and PDF for test-case Description of problem: This seems to be a resurfacing of bug #223971 but since I saw no way to reopen that bug (sorry if I'm wrong) I'm reporting this again. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.5.1 How reproducible: In a word processor, select Lohit Kannada font and input Kannada Unicode sequences having consonant clusters of the format CCV. I have attached a sample ODT. Actual results: Except in a few cases of "popular" consonant clusters like K.SSA ಕ್ಷ and J.NYA ಜ್ಞ, the vowel signs are not attached properly. When the same text is rendered with other fonts (like Tunga of Microsoft even loaded into Linux's LibreOffice) the sequences are shown properly without overlaps or malformed glyphs. Expected results: The Kannada language uses lots of Sanskrit-based words and hence has many consonant clusters with two and even three consonants. Also, when English words are transliterated in Kannada script like ಎಕ್ಸ್ಪ್ಲೋರ್ (explore) etc for sign-boards etc, even more consonant clusters will occur. In all these cases Lohit Kannada should be able to gracefully handle such consonant clusters and not output overlapping or malformed glyphs. Additional info: I have attached an ODT and PDF file demonstrating the problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 25

[Bug 827516] New: [kn_IN] Vowel Signs U and UU do not correctly attach to many consonants in Lohit Kannada
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827516 Bug ID: 827516 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: 16 Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [kn_IN] Vowel Signs U and UU do not correctly attach to many consonants in Lohit Kannada Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-kannada-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 588536 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=588536&action=edit ODT and PDF for test-case Description of problem: While most other CONSONANT + VOWEL SIGN combinations in Lohit Kannada are mapped to precomposed glyphs, there are no pre-composed glyphs for vowel signs U and UU except for the consonants PA, PHA and VA (where the stroke for U/UU needs to come from below the consonant rather than the normal right side of the consonant). While in most cases, by virtue of appropriate RSB and LSB values of the consonant glyph and vowel sign glyph, the simple sequence of the two glyphs creates an appropriate appearance, this leaves out several instances where the glyphs do not overlap at all and hence appear disjointed. For a professional appearance of the font, this should be fixed. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.5.1 How reproducible: Input all possible sequences of Kannada consonants with vowel signs U and UU. (See attached ODT for text. Use BabelMap [http://www.babelstone.co.uk/software/babelmap.html] if you want the codepoints.) Actual results: You can see (as in the attached PDF) that some consonants do not properly get attached to the vowel signs U and UU. Expected results: All consonants should properly get attached to the vowel signs U and UU. Additional info: Consonants which are not properly joined with vowel sign U: KA* NYA DDA DA BA RA SSA** RRA LLLA*** * = see at high magnification ** = may need separate precomposed glyph with some adjustment to shape of left side of vowel sign *** = so-called FA of Kannada Unicode Consonants which are not properly joined with vowel sign UU: Those already listed above for U, plus GHA and LLA, due to the shorter height of the left-side ending node of this vowel sign. I think in most cases appropriate kerning should solve the problem, except for SSA + -U/-UU, GHA + -UU and LLA + -UU where separate glyphs would be advisable. It is curious to note that DDA DA and BA are all disjointed whereas their aspirated counterparts DDHA DHA and BHA which all have only an additional notch-like stroke at the bottom are correctly joined with the vowel sign. I think the LSB RSB values are carelessly allotted in some cases, unfortunately. Other problems: CU JU -- the pointed part on the left of the vowel sign U passes through the consonants and comes out above (see carefully) -- actually *negative* kerning is needed here so that the pointed part should only enter the consonant and not again exit it. (It seems this problem does not occur for vowel sign UU due to the shorter height of the left-side ending node of this vowel sign which causes a problem with GHA and LLA instead -- see above!) Note: Unfortunately I will not be able to provide a TTF patch for this as I am already short of time on my official projects. Please take care of it. Thank you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 11

[Bug 839303] New: [ta_IN] Submission of glyphs for Tamil fractions/symbols to be included in the Lohit Tamil fonts
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839303 Bug ID: 839303 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: rawhide Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [ta_IN] Submission of glyphs for Tamil fractions/symbols to be included in the Lohit Tamil fonts Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-tamil-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 597580 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597580&action=edit Lohit Tamil, Lohit Tamil Classical and Lohit Tamil Chart fonts with new characters Contributing new Tamil glyphs to Lohit Tamil family: ---------------------------------------------------- I have prepared a proposal to encode 62 characters for old Tamil fractions and symbols to be encoded in Unicode. Seven of these are being proposed for the Tamil BMP block and rest for a new Tamil Supplement block in the SMP. For the glyphs required for the code chart I have largely devised new glyphs based on existing Lohit Tamil glyphs under the derivative rights granted by the OFL. Some glyphs which could not be derived, I created myself using Inkscape and other tools. I would like to donate all these glyphs to the Lohit project under the OFL for eventual inclusion into the Lohit Tamil/Tamil Classical fonts. For now they may be included in the PUA of an unofficial fork of the Lohit Tamil fonts. When they are eventually encoded in Unicode, they may be officially mapped to the new codepoints and included in the official distribution of the Lohit Tamil/Tamil Classical fonts. Using Lohit Tamil glyphs for Unicode code chart: ------------------------------------------------ In the proposal, I am also requesting the Unicode / ISO 10646 project editors to use the Lohit Tamil font for the Unicode Tamil code charts (Tamil block, and newly proposed Tamil Supplement block) because: 1) When the new characters are encoded and my glyphs used for the code chart, it would look good to maintain stylistic uniformity in the code chart, and my designed glyphs are stylistically like the Lohit Tamil glyphs as they are mostly derived from them. So it would be good to use Lohit Tamil glyphs throughout. 2) There are currently 72 Tamil characters in Unicode 6.1.0. The present proposal almost doubles the number with 62 new characters. It would be a significant and unnecessary effort for anyone else to duplicate my glyph design work for so many characters to keep in with the current Tamil code chart font style. So switching to Lohit Tamil for all glyphs is easier and advisable. 3) Personally I think the glyphs of Lohit Tamil are much "cleaner" than the existing Tamil code chart font, and more representative of the nature and beauty of the Tamil script. 4) The OFL already permits the use of the Lohit Tamil font (and its derivatives) for any purpose, so there are (hopefully) no legal issues pertaining which need to be cleared between Unicode and Red Hat (but of course, IANAL). I also sincerely request the cooperation of the Lohit / Fedora / Red Hat people in permitting the Lohit Tamil glyphs to be used for the Unicode Tamil code charts (i.e. for two blocks). Fonts with new glyphs: ---------------------- I attach herewith a ZIP file containing three font files: 1) Lohit Tamil font, with newly proposed character glyphs mapped to the PUA. 2) Lohit Tamil Classical font, likewise. 3) Lohit Tamil Chart font, containing only glyphs required for the code chart (for existing and new characters, totalling 134 in number, across two blocks Tamil and Tamil Supplement) mapped to the existing and proposed characters for convenience of Unicode / ISO 10646 editors. Behaviour of new characters and requirement from the fonts' side: ----------------------------------------------------------------- None of the newly proposed characters are combining characters in the sense of combining marks. However, most of them are proposed for a new SMP Tamil block and care might need to be taken for proper mapping so that on all platforms the SMP characters are accessible. There is only one sequence of characters which needs to ligate: TAMIL DIGIT ONE ௧ + TAMIL SIGN KALAM (which looks like TAMIL LETTER LLA ள) should always ligate. I have also provided the ligature glyph after the glyphs for the individual characters (mapped to PUA E03F) in the fonts 1 and 2 above. I have not added any substitution mapping however as it is for now only temporarily in the PUA. Etcetera: --------- It is my intention to submit the proposal within a week or so and I will upload/link here a copy of the proposal. If at all any changes are required to the set of glyphs as a result of any feedback from scholars or other sources, I will upload fresh TTF font files. I thank everyone, especially Pravin Satpute, for their support regarding this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 19

[Bug 841947] New: [te_IN] Add support for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha to Lohit Telugu font
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841947 Bug ID: 841947 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: rawhide Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [te_IN] Add support for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha to Lohit Telugu font Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-telugu-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 599423 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=599423&action=edit Glyphs for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha Telugu script has special form of vowelless NA called four-pronged nakaarapollu. Strictly speaking nakaarapollu means nakaara + pollu=virama so regular form of vowelless-NA న్ is also nakaarapollu but Telugu old grammarian Brown has specifically called a distinct form as nakaarapollu. The recommended model for getting Telugu nakaarapollu is NA + ZWJ + VIRAMA. Please find more details in the document: https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/utcsubmissions/11409-telugu-n… Likewise Telugu script has old repha form which is not found in common usage in current Telugu script. A modern-style Telugu font can allow user to select old-style reph by using the sequence RA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + CONSONANT because the plain RA + VIRAMA + CONSONANT would be presented as RA with sub-base form of CONSONANT. Please find more details in the document: https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/utcsubmissions/12017-telugu-r… These two documents have been approved by the UTC in the Feb 2012 meeting: http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2012/12007.htm <quote> [130-A15] Action Item for Deborah Anderson, Editorial Committee: Update the core specification text on Telugu nakaara-pollu based on input in document L2/11-409. [130-A16] Action Item for Deborah Anderson: Incorporate text on Telugu Reph from L2/12-017 into the Telugu block description. </quote> It is requested to: 1) add the glyphs for nakaarapollu and repha to the Lohit Telugu font: 2) add substitution mapping of NA + ZWJ + VIRAMA to the nakaarapollu glyph 3) add requisite OT markups for repha glyph so that a compliant OT system can recognize the repha glyph and render sequence of RA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + CONS using that glyph. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 10

[Bug 982601] New: [ml_IN] Addition of glyphs to Lohit Malayalam to support recently proposed Unicode characters
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982601 Bug ID: 982601 Summary: [ml_IN] Addition of glyphs to Lohit Malayalam to support recently proposed Unicode characters Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: lohit-malayalam-fonts Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 770964 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=770964&action=edit Glyphs for Malayalam Archaic II, minor fractions and Chillu LLL Recently I and Cibu Johny have proposed various characters to be added to the Malayalam Unicode block and in the last May 2013 UTC meeting they have been approved and further (IIUC) approved by the WG2 meeting last month in Lithunia. The links are provided below: N4429 Proposal to encode Malayalam minor fractions http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4429.pdf N4428 Proposal to encode MALAYALAM LETTER CHILLU LLL http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4428.pdf N4312 Proposal for MALAYALAM LETTER ARCHAIC II http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4312.pdf This is a placeholder bug (like bug #839303 for Tamil fractions and symbols) to ensure that the requisite glyphs are added immediately once the characters are published in the Unicode standard finally. I have designed the glyphs for these proposed characters partially based on existing glyphs from the Lohit Malayalam font and would like to submit these as my contributions to the Lohit project under the OFL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CqoPzu7D2p&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 19

[Bug 1076190] New: Rendering of Unicode tie bars could be improved
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076190 Bug ID: 1076190 Summary: Rendering of Unicode tie bars could be improved Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Severity: low Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 874108 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=874108&action=edit comparison between Liberation Sans and Helvetica Description of problem: The rendering of the two Unicode tie bar combining characters (U+035E and U+035F) is not ideal. In particular the characters are quite short and far away from the characters they are tying together. This makes it appear more like a misplaced macron than a tie bar. The rendering in Liberation Sans appears to be equivalent to that of Arial which has the same issues. The rendering in Helvetica is better (see attachment 1). In particular, because the under tie bar (U+035F) is so far away from the other characters, it sometimes gets clipped when rendered, as it appears to fall slightly outside of the bounding box for the line height (see attachment 2). My suggestion would be to make the length of both tie bars slightly longer, and to move both of them slightly closer to the characters they are intended to tie together. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 12-Mar-2014 (2.x) How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install latest Liberation Sans (and Helvetica if you want to compare) 2. Go to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Kaldari/Font_test_2 Actual results: Tie bars should be slightly longer and closer to the other characters. Expected results: Tie bar are quite short and far away. Additional info: See attachments for more info. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4qagSOJtp5&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 16

[Bug 1084227] New: Arrow symbols too small and not nicely aligned
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084227 Bug ID: 1084227 Summary: Arrow symbols too small and not nicely aligned Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: Eduard.Braun2(a)gmx.de QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 882471 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=882471&action=edit testcase with some exemplary arrows The arrow symbols contained in Liberation fonts seem to be too small and also a little mis-aligned. As an example consider the attached testcase which contains left/right/up/down arrows exemplarily. The attached screenshot is a rendering of this file to illustrate the issue: - The arrows are much to small making them hardly discernible, especially at small font sizes. - The horizontally aligned arrows are positioned too low (nearly at the baseline). - Also visible: Hinting for the vertically aligned arrows is bad. The screenshot was created with Firefox 28.0 on Windows 7. The installed version of the Liberation fonts is 2.00.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kmf7UnRYux&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 12

[Bug 1409348] New: Some fonts (such as Droid Sans) don' t work anymore on some websites with Firefox
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409348 Bug ID: 1409348 Summary: Some fonts (such as Droid Sans) don't work anymore on some websites with Firefox Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: google-droid-fonts Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: nekohayo(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, hobbes1069(a)gmail.com, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, tremble(a)tremble.org.uk Screenshot: https://bug1257709.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=8731947 Sample website: http://jeff.ecchi.ca This website uses the Droid Sans fonts, but somehow Firefox I had originally filed a bug on Firefox at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1257709 but from what I can see now this is actually a bug that is specific to Fedora—either Fedora's version of Firefox, or Fedora's version of the Google Droid fonts: - The issue does not occur on Firefox on other OSes (OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, Ubuntu, Mac OS X). - The issue does not occur if you do "dnf remove google-droid*" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 6

[Bug 1398676] New: Pango sometimes shows a replacement character for space (U+0020) when a font lacks a space
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398676 Bug ID: 1398676 Summary: Pango sometimes shows a replacement character for space (U+0020) when a font lacks a space Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: pango Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: mfabian(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, tagoh(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1224372 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1224372&action=edit pango-bug.png Tested on the released version of Fedora 25. pango-1.40.3-1.fc25.x86_64 When using a font which does not have a space, Pango may show a replacement character for space( U+0020). I’ll attach the file rovas.txt which has a first line containing only Old Hungarian script and a space. I’ll also attach an old Hungarian font taken from https://github.com/OldHungarian/old-hungarian-font/releases which lacks a space. Display the test file like this: pango-view --font="Old Hungarian" ~/rovas.txt And you get something as in the also attached screenshot which shows that Pango renders the space as an replacement character. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 12

[Bug 1319249] New: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Nov '17

22 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319249 Bug ID: 1319249 Summary: incorrect use of Requires(pre)? Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: ghostscript-fonts Assignee: twaugh(a)redhat.com Reporter: jsilhan(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, twaugh(a)redhat.com We've identified your package for having `Requires(pre)` RPM flag without `Requires` [1]. `Requires(pre)` rpm tag could be interpreted wrongly, so to prevent any harm to Fedora users I am notifying you about this fact. Any package that is specified in `Requires(pre)` could be freely removed. Citing from RPM pages: ``` If there are no other dependencies on the package providing /usr/sbin/useradd, that package is permitted to be removed from the system after installation(!) ``` [2] If you really rely on dependency just during the installation process and your package don't necessary require the dependency for the proper run of your application then ignore this bug report and close it as NOTABUG. Otherwise add to your spec file additional `Requires` for the dependency, please. [1] paste.fedoraproject.org/341611/82208431 [2] http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/MoreOnDependencies -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 3

[Bug 477389] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Nov '17

22 Nov '17

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=477389 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: ghostscript-fonts AssignedTo: twaugh(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: twaugh(a)redhat.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.

2 12

[Bug 1504433] New: thai-arundina-fonts-0.2.2 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Nov '17

11 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1504433 Bug ID: 1504433 Summary: thai-arundina-fonts-0.2.2 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: thai-arundina-fonts Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: pwu(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pwu(a)redhat.com Latest upstream release: 0.2.2 Current version/release in rawhide: 0.2.1-3.fc27 URL: http://linux.thai.net/pub/thailinux/software/fonts-sipa-arundina/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/4964/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 8

[Bug 1503250] New: Outdated package
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Nov '17

11 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1503250 Bug ID: 1503250 Summary: Outdated package Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: adobe-source-sans-pro-fonts Assignee: alexis.lameire(a)gmail.com Reporter: hitori.gm(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: alexis.lameire(a)gmail.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pikachu.2014(a)gmail.com Current package version (1.050-7) is 3 years old which is missing Cyrillic and Greek support. The latest version (2.020R-ro/1.075R-it) can be found at https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-sans-pro/releases/tag/2.020R-ro%2F1.0… P.S.: bug 1246765 has a patch with updated spec provided by Michael Kuhn. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 9

[Bug 1469712] New: font antialiasing/hinting is not working on Fedora 26
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 10 Nov '17

10 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469712 Bug ID: 1469712 Summary: font antialiasing/hinting is not working on Fedora 26 Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: freetype Severity: high Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: mchehab(a)infradead.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, mkasik(a)redhat.com Description of problem: After upgrading from Fedora 25 to Fedora 26, font hinting doesn't work anymore. All fonts look really ugly on my 32' monitor, and changing font antialias/hint options at Gnome, Plasma or Mate doesn't produce any visible changes anymore. With Fedora 25, I used freetype-freeword from rpmfusion, as it produced a better result than the default freetype font hinting (although both work). On Fedora 26, neither with or without freetype-freeword I can adjust font hint/antialias anymore, as those options don't work anymore. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): freetype-2.7.1-9.fc26.x86_64 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 10

[Bug 1470509] New: freetype/harfbuzz fc25->fc26 turns to ugly rendering
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 01 Nov '17

01 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470509 Bug ID: 1470509 Summary: freetype/harfbuzz fc25->fc26 turns to ugly rendering Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: freetype Severity: medium Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: pb(a)bieringer.de QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, mkasik(a)redhat.com Description of problem: While on fc25 I have sharp fonts on a 1600x1200 96 dpi display after upgrade to fc26 the rendering is ugly Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): freetype-2.7.1-9.fc26.x86_64 harfbuzz-1.4.4-1.fc26.x86_64 harfbuzz-icu-1.4.4-1.fc26.x86_64 (from updates-testing) + fc26 original How reproducible: at least on 2 systems Steps to Reproduce: 1. upgrade to fc26 2. login Actual results: bad system font rendering Expected results: same rendering as on fc25 Additional info: # xrdb -q Xft.lcdfilter: lcddefault Xft.antialias: 0 Xft.hinting: 1 Xft.hintstyle: hintslight Xft.rgba: rgb Xft.dpi: 96 Xcursor.theme: default Xcursor.size: 21 Xcursor.theme_core: 1 after downgrade with fc25 packages: freetype-2.6.5-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm harfbuzz-1.3.2-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm harfbuzz-icu-1.3.2-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm after reboot returns to previous and well rendering behavior. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 11

[Bug 1506926] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 Oct '17

31 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506926 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2017-10-31 06:09:22 --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- thanks. built on rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=25500 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506925] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 Oct '17

31 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506925 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2017-10-31 06:08:19 --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- thanks. built on rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=25501 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506918] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 Oct '17

31 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506918 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2017-10-31 05:39:50 --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- thanks. built on rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=25518 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506916] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 31 Oct '17

31 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506916 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2017-10-31 04:50:31 --- Comment #4 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- thanks. built on rawhide. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=25509 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506926] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506926 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/adobe-source-han-serif-kr-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506925] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506925 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/adobe-source-han-sans-kr-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506918] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506918 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/adobe-source-han-serif-jp-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506916] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506916 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #20 from Federico Bruni <fede(a)inventati.org> --- Sure, no hurry here :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #19 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- Thank you Federico for the info. :) Unfortunately, I'm currently really busy with my primary work responsibilities. I hope to look at this next week. My guess is that this will land into F27 updates repo (too late for Final Freeze) and Rawhide. Is this okay for you? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506961] Review Request: adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType UI font for mixed Latin and Japanese text
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506961 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Perfect, package accepted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506961] Review Request: adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType UI font for mixed Latin and Japanese text
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Oct '17

30 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506961 --- Comment #2 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- Thanks for review. updated. Spec URL: https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/reviews/adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts/adobe… SRPM URL: https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/reviews/adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts/adobe… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506961] Review Request: adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType UI font for mixed Latin and Japanese text
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506961 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Hello, - Source0 is returning error 404. Use this instead: Source0: https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-han-code-jp/archive/%{version}R/%{arc… - The README.md file has executable permissions, this isn't good. Remove the executable bits in %prep and notify upstream about this issue. chmod 0644 README.md -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506916] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506916 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Package accepted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506926] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506926 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Package is good and accepted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506925] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506925 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Package accepted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506918] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 28 Oct '17

28 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506918 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Hello, Package is good and accepted. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506961] Review Request: adobe-source-han-code-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType UI font for mixed Latin and Japanese text
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506961 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506916] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506916 David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dkaspar(a)redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506926] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506926 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506925] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-kr-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Korean
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506925 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506918] Review Request: adobe-source-han-serif-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506918 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1506916] Review Request: adobe-source-han-sans-jp-fonts - Adobe OpenType Pan-CJK font family for Japanese
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 27 Oct '17

27 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1506916 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 26 Oct '17

26 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #18 from Federico Bruni <fede(a)inventati.org> --- David, OTF files would be useful also to be able to compile LilyPond (a music typesetting program, packaged in Fedora) without a warning: WARNING: Please consider installing optional programs or files: URW++ OTF fonts These files are optional but it would be nice to have them. Recent discussion on the subject is here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2017-10/msg00141.html Thanks for your efforts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1500695] New: CVE-2017-13720 CVE-2017-13722 libXfont: various flaws [ fedora-all]
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 25 Oct '17

25 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1500695 Bug ID: 1500695 Summary: CVE-2017-13720 CVE-2017-13722 libXfont: various flaws [fedora-all] Product: Fedora Version: 26 Component: libXfont Keywords: Security, SecurityTracking Severity: low Priority: low Assignee: btissoir(a)redhat.com Reporter: anemec(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, alexl(a)redhat.com, btissoir(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, caolanm(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, jglisse(a)redhat.com, john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mbarnes(a)fastmail.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com This is an automatically created tracking bug! It was created to ensure that one or more security vulnerabilities are fixed in affected versions of fedora-all. For comments that are specific to the vulnerability please use bugs filed against the "Security Response" product referenced in the "Blocks" field. For more information see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/TrackingBugs When submitting as an update, use the fedpkg template provided in the next comment(s). This will include the bug IDs of this tracking bug as well as the relevant top-level CVE bugs. Please also mention the CVE IDs being fixed in the RPM changelog and the fedpkg commit message. NOTE: this issue affects multiple supported versions of Fedora. While only one tracking bug has been filed, please correct all affected versions at the same time. If you need to fix the versions independent of each other, you may clone this bug as appropriate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 13

[Bug 1258542] Review Request: hack-fonts - A typeface designed for source code
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 20 Oct '17

20 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1258542 --- Comment #36 from Shawn Starr <shawn.starr(a)rogers.com> --- Note: https://github.com/source-foundry/Hack/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md 3.00 is released, but we're still blocked here... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1497579] New: python-fontMath-0.4.4 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Oct '17

11 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497579 Bug ID: 1497579 Summary: python-fontMath-0.4.4 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: python-fontMath Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: athoscribeiro(a)gmail.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: athoscribeiro(a)gmail.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com Latest upstream release: 0.4.4 Current version/release in rawhide: 0.4.3-3.fc27 URL: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/fontMath Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/13898/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 7

[Bug 1258542] Review Request: hack-fonts - A typeface designed for source code
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 05 Oct '17

05 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1258542 Shawn Starr <shawn.starr(a)rogers.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1440971 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440971 [Bug 1440971] Review Request: python-pyclipper - Cython wrapper for the C++ translation of the Angus Johnson's Clipper library -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1498747] New: gv is not finding standard postscript fonts like Times-Roman
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 05 Oct '17

05 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1498747 Bug ID: 1498747 Summary: gv is not finding standard postscript fonts like Times-Roman Product: Fedora Version: 27 Component: urw-fonts Severity: medium Assignee: dkaspar(a)redhat.com Reporter: nvwarr(a)hotmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: dkaspar(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, than(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1334637 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1334637&action=edit Simple eps file to illustrate the problem Description of problem: gv is not finding the standard postscript fonts like Times-Roman. The same is true of epstopdf (from texlive-epstopdf-bin) and gs. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gv-3.7.4-14.fc27.x86_64 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. gv circle.eps (with the attached eps file) Actual results: shows the circle and gives an invalid font error message and does not show the text "circle" which should be in the middle of the circle. Expected results: should show the circle with the text in the middle without an error message. Additional info: It works fine on Fedora 26 with: gv-3.7.4-12.fc26.x86_64 On Fedora 26, these fonts belong to urw-fonts. According to dnf whatprovides /usr/share/fonts/default/Type1 the package urw-fonts still exists and still provides the directory where the fonts should be, but it can't be installed because of a conflict: dnf install urw-fonts gives: Package urw-base35-fonts-20170801-2.fc27.noarch is already installed, skipping. Manually copying the fonts from the Fedora 26 to the Fedora 27 system fixes the problem. So it seems to be a packaging issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 1

[Bug 1376476] urw-fonts: new release(20160926) available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 04 Oct '17

04 Oct '17

1 0

[Bug 1376476] urw-fonts: new release(20160926) available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 04 Oct '17

04 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376476 Bug 1376476 depends on bug 1458840, which changed state. Bug 1458840 Summary: Review Request: urw-base35-fonts - Level 2 Core Font Set for Ghostscript https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1458840 What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1498063] New: fonttools-3.16.0 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 03 Oct '17

03 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1498063 Bug ID: 1498063 Summary: fonttools-3.16.0 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide 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, sshedmak(a)redhat.com Latest upstream release: 3.16.0 Current version/release in rawhide: 3.15.1-1.fc28 URL: https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring 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/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 4

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #17 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- Thanks for the explanation. That might help me to keep a little pressure on Ghostscript for them to move to OTF at some point. :) (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #16) > All the usual suspects that concentrate "my text does not work" questions on > Stack overflow… Heh, yeah. :D You've summed it up perfectly. I guess I should create a new tracking BZ in the future to track which of these apps now support OTF and which not. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> --- (In reply to David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] from comment #14) > And as I mentioned in my previous comment, the ImageMagick also expects the > Type1 /AFM fonts, and I expect there are some other applications might > require it as well. Here's the list of packages requiring the old > 'urw-fonts' package: > > ghostscript-core > grace > GraphicsMagick > graphviz > htmldoc > ipe > libwmf > mscgen > pdf-renderer > pokerth > root-core > synfig > xpdf > ImageMagick All the usual suspects that concentrate "my text does not work" questions on Stack overflow… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> --- (In reply to David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] from comment #13) > Looking at the sizes of the OTF and TTF, the OTF seems to be "compressed", > therefore in order to save users' space, I would again vote for using this > format. TTF uses quadratic splines whereas OTF uses cubic splines. Type1 uses cubic splines. That's why you can get lossless glyph shape conversion between Type1 and OTF but not between Type1 and TTF, and why upstream wrote they absolutely needed a CFF format to make sure there was no deviation in metrics from the standard. (One can approximate a cubic spline with a series of quadratic splines, that's how font tools convert Type1/OTF to TTF, the result is good enough for the human eye, but technically it's not lossless. In your case absolutely no deviation is better than minimal deviations given the glyph sizes are standardised). That's why generally speaking it's better to use OTF when evolving a Type1 font, except for legacy windows-oriented apps that understand TTF but not OTF. Linux systems do not care they have good support both for OTF and for TTF. Hardware has passed the point where computing cubics was significantly more expensive than computing quadratics a long time ago. The spline part of OTF files is more compact than Type1. One is CFF2 the other is CFF1 — they are mathematically equivalent but the state of the art had improved between both specs (both written essentially by Adobe). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #14 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #12) > BTW OTF *is* the OpenType (SFNT) format used to ship CFF outlines nowadays > so unless upstream did something really weird with its OTF files they > satisfy : > > # According to upstream, Ghostscript needs only Type 1 fonts to work > properly. > # It can use TTF or OTF fonts as substitutions as well in case the Type 1 > # fonts are missing, but the substitution is not (and can't be) > guaranteed to > # be absolutely flawless, unless the fonts use the CFF outlines: > # > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostScript_fonts#Compact_Font_Format > > https://blog.typekit.com/2010/12/02/the-benefits-of-opentypecff-over- > truetype/ Yeah, I realize that. That's why there's that additional note in specfile, that even though most of the Ghostscript should work with OTF now, the 'pdfwrite' device is still not able to do so... :-/ And as I mentioned in my previous comment, the ImageMagick also expects the Type1 /AFM fonts, and I expect there are some other applications might require it as well. Here's the list of packages requiring the old 'urw-fonts' package: ghostscript-core grace GraphicsMagick graphviz htmldoc ipe libwmf mscgen pdf-renderer pokerth root-core synfig xpdf ImageMagick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #13 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #10) > That's a poor situation to be in, but yes the minimum would be to ship the > OpenType¹ versions as required by Fedora packaging guidelines, and maybe > hide somewhere the Type1/AFM versions for GS private use (after asking > Fesco). The first priority would be to avoid Ghostscript blocking progress > in other apps that want to use those fonts. If that can help you in any way, > you have my blessing, for the little it is worth. I'm OK to ship it all together (i.e. *.t1 living next to *.otf), in order for the fonts to have the same file path (I would like to avoid creating a symlinks in that folder). The reason why we now need the Type1 to be living in that exact folder name is that ImageMagick has just added support for 'urw-base35-fonts' and it is expecting the Type1 fonts in that specific location: https://github.com/ImageMagick/ImageMagick/commit/fbca0d09324006b66b01e (I forgot to mention that there are other packages still depending on the Type1 format - ImageMagick is the one of them, and AFAICT there are others.) > As an aside I understand the reluctance of Ghostscript upstream to switch > from "proven" Type1 fonts but let's be honest, Ghostscript is fed all kinds > of stuff by third-party apps, the Type1 support of those apps is going away, > they *will* preferentially use OpenType files, so long term there will be > all sorts of subtle discrepancies between a Ghostscript that understands URW > as "Type1", and the rest of the world that thinks "Opentype". But that's > typically a "choose your poison" situation for the Ghostscript maintainer, > it need not impact the rest of the distro the way it does now. You're getting to the core of the problem here actually. As I mentioned before, Ghostscript upstream does not want to switch to OTF/TTF, because one of their "devices" (inside of Ghostscript called 'pdfwrite', used for conversions, etc.) would not work in quite few scenarios (I had some bug reports about it before IIRC), thus making the PS->PDF and PDF->PS conversions not working. So as the rest of the World is slowly starting to use the OTF/TTF, the Ghostscript is using Type1 fonts (converted from the OTF files actually), and they most likely will be doing it for a long time to come. That's because they are bundling the Type1 fonts with the Ghostscript vanilla sources, so they do not need to care about the rest of the World going with OTF. And that's because of the FPG that we actually ship a separate package for these fonts (because FPG forbids bundling of software, unless there is an exception from FESco). And that's why many other distros IMHO do not face these problems, because they do not care so much about bundling the software - they built it from vanilla sources (with a lots of other bundled libraries, etc.) and just ship it. When this happens, they can have both OTF fonts and Type1 fonts living next to each other. (Type1 is being shipped as part of Ghostscript's resources.) Looking at the sizes of the OTF and TTF, the OTF seems to be "compressed", therefore in order to save users' space, I would again vote for using this format. So to conclude, I will take this to a FESco, but I need to find out how to do this officially first. And I'm currently being under time pressure both from my primary job responsibilities and F27 release schedule - because the process of putting this package into F27 is already underway, and I can't stop it anymore - other packages are currently depending on it as well. In this case, I will probably take the way of "EAFP" instead of "LBYL", make the changes ASAP, and then inform FESco about this and "ask for forgiveness"... :D -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> --- BTW OTF *is* the OpenType (SFNT) format used to ship CFF outlines nowadays so unless upstream did something really weird with its OTF files they satisfy : # According to upstream, Ghostscript needs only Type 1 fonts to work properly. # It can use TTF or OTF fonts as substitutions as well in case the Type 1 # fonts are missing, but the substitution is not (and can't be) guaranteed to # be absolutely flawless, unless the fonts use the CFF outlines: # > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostScript_fonts#Compact_Font_Format https://blog.typekit.com/2010/12/02/the-benefits-of-opentypecff-over-truety… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #11 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #9) > Note however that Appstream for fonts was heavily influenced by Debian, and > Debian didn't rebase its font packaging around fontconfig as Fedora did a > few years ago, so a lot of the "Need to do foo in appstream because > fontconfig is insufficient or fonts are broken" do not really apply for > Fedora. > > If the font metadata is bad for example Fedora would prefer the packager to > fix the font and patch the metadata rather than hide the brokenness under an > Appstream overlay (which won't exist for apps that use the fonts anyway). I see. :) Well, I hope the AppStream and fontconfig metadata are mostly OK for the moment - at least for the urw-base35-fonts. I've spent a lot of time to get it right. (Currently, there was a small issue with typo in AppStream metadata that has a pull-request waiting for acceptance, and small issue with Standard Symbols PS being to big when used for LGC fonts.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> --- (In reply to David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] from comment #7) > Do you have any suggestion on how to proceed from here? Should I take this > to FESco and ask for official exception/permission to ship both Type1/AFM > and OTF formats? That's a poor situation to be in, but yes the minimum would be to ship the OpenType¹ versions as required by Fedora packaging guidelines, and maybe hide somewhere the Type1/AFM versions for GS private use (after asking Fesco). The first priority would be to avoid Ghostscript blocking progress in other apps that want to use those fonts. If that can help you in any way, you have my blessing, for the little it is worth. As an aside I understand the reluctance of Ghostscript upstream to switch from "proven" Type1 fonts but let's be honest, Ghostscript is fed all kinds of stuff by third-party apps, the Type1 support of those apps is going away, they *will* preferentially use OpenType files, so long term there will be all sorts of subtle discrepancies between a Ghostscript that understands URW as "Type1", and the rest of the world that thinks "Opentype". But that's typically a "choose your poison" situation for the Ghostscript maintainer, it need not impact the rest of the distro the way it does now. ¹ Probably OTF not TTF given the Type1 history of those fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1094015] Review Request: cwtex-q-fonts - a series of modern traditional Chinese fonts
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1094015 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo? | --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> --- > (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #3) > > It does not matter if they are packaged as texlive subpackages or as > > independent projects as long as the template is applied. Also, whoever > > packages them needs to ship some fontconfig files that aliases the various > > past names of the fonts to the new one for backwards compat. Again there are > > templates to do so in fontpackages-devel. > > That's another issue. Ideally, the good fonts should not only have the > fontconfig files properly created for them, but AppStream files as well. Yes, Appstream is yet another thing to have. Note however that Appstream for fonts was heavily influenced by Debian, and Debian didn't rebase its font packaging around fontconfig as Fedora did a few years ago, so a lot of the "Need to do foo in appstream because fontconfig is insufficient or fonts are broken" do not really apply for Fedora. If the font metadata is bad for example Fedora would prefer the packager to fix the font and patch the metadata rather than hide the brokenness under an Appstream overlay (which won't exist for apps that use the fonts anyway). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo? --- Comment #8 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #3) > Reading > http://www.gust.org.pl/projects/e-foundry/tex-gyre/index_html#Licensing > > they got URW to publish the fonts under their own pet license to avoid > dealing with Ghostscript licensing they didn't understood. So as long as > they rebased to that release with no ghostscript import they are ok > legal-wise (do check with spot if you feel like it, though I'm pretty sure > he'd have blocked them from TexLive during its TEX audits if there was still > a problem). > > That sucks if GS added fixes over URW material, but that's how free software > works when projects disagree on licensing. Actually, that note mentions Ghostscript 4.0, which is really old. We currently have 9.X for a quite long time in Fedora now. That might be worth poking in it, to see what the current status is... :) (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #1) > Someone should really package tex gyre in Fedora, now that the legal issues > have been solved (IIRC). That's basically the same fonts in an opentype > container. Sorry, I'm not going through that rabbit hole again... :D The reason I went into updating urw-base35-fonts was that those are needed by ghostscript, and I want to finally fix all the issues related to f***ed building process. However, if you want, feel free to take inspiration from urw-base35-fonts specfile: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/urw-base35-fonts/blob/master/f/urw-base3… It should be more or less OK (I'm trying to keep it up-to-date), and should be well commented. (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #3) > It does not matter if they are packaged as texlive subpackages or as > independent projects as long as the template is applied. Also, whoever > packages them needs to ship some fontconfig files that aliases the various > past names of the fonts to the new one for backwards compat. Again there are > templates to do so in fontpackages-devel. That's another issue. Ideally, the good fonts should not only have the fontconfig files properly created for them, but AppStream files as well. I had to create/copy & modify those files manually for urw-base35-fonts, and it took quite some effort to convince usptream to include them in their releases. The AppStream for font files allow users to see the preview of them in Gnome Software (and other software centers in other distros that are using AppStream). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

[Bug 1496466] URW fonts not available in LibreOffice
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 02 Oct '17

02 Oct '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466 David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|needinfo?(dkaspar(a)redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #7 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar(a)redhat.com> --- Hello guys, sorry for the delayed response, I had a vacation. :) (In reply to Alexander Ploumistos from comment #6) > David, I saw that the source package for urw-base35-fonts contains afm, otf, > t1 and ttf formats. Is there a reason why you left OpenType and TrueType out? Actually, there is. I was also up for using either TTF or OTF formats for shipping those fonts, but after long discussions with (URW)++ fonts upstream (de-facto Artifex Company - creators of ghostscript), I was "forced" to use the Type1 formats with the metrics files (AFM). Here's the justification (excerpt from urw-base35-fonts' specfile): # According to upstream, Ghostscript needs only Type 1 fonts to work properly. # It can use TTF or OTF fonts as substitutions as well in case the Type 1 # fonts are missing, but the substitution is not (and can't be) guaranteed to # be absolutely flawless, unless the fonts use the CFF outlines: # > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostScript_fonts#Compact_Font_Format # # The AFM (Adobe Font Metrics) are useful for layout purposes of other # applications, and they contain general font information and font metrics. # These AFM files were distributed in the previous 'urw-fonts' package, so in # order to avoid possible regressions in the future, we need to continue # distributing them. # NOTE: Fedora Packaging Guidelines (FPG) requires to use OTF or TTF format: # https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Choosing_the_right_font_format_to_package # # However, according to upstream, the OTF/TTF fonts cause problems # with 'pdfwrite' if we try to use them as base35 fonts. Otherwise, # they work fine, but according to upstream they will *never* be able # to use OTF/TTF fonts as the base35. # # Since AFAIK no other package/utility requires the base35 fonts, and # Type 1 fonts with the AFM files are necessary for ghostscript to # function properly, this fonts package will only use these files. We # are not shipping the OTF alongside Type 1/AFM, because that would # approximately double the size of the packages, which is not wanted. # # In case the ghostscript (specifically 'pdfwrite' device) will start # to work correctly with OTF fonts type, then we will make the switch. I'm okay with shipping the fonts in the OTF format as well (it now easiery after several discussions with upstream), but I would expect people to start complaining about it that the fonts are duplicated on their systems and that the size of the packages is doubled unnecessary. Do you have any suggestion on how to proceed from here? Should I take this to FESco and ask for official exception/permission to ship both Type1/AFM and OTF formats? Because right now, we are kind of in a dead-end situation: * ghostscript will not work properly without Type1/AFM (and I've spent a lot of time to calm things down with ghostscript upstream, and I don't want to mess it up again - they kind of hated us already before, because we kept messing with their software improperly and they were receving not relevant bug reports because of it) * the new LibreOffice will not work with the old Type1/AFM and it needs the OTF, as you said -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs October 2017