fonts-bugs July 2017

fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
104 discussions

[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 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 1260061] New: fallbacks for TmsRmn and Helv
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Sep '17

02 Sep '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260061 Bug ID: 1260061 Summary: fallbacks for TmsRmn and Helv Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: fontconfig Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: caolanm(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 External Bug ID: Document Foundation 91004 External Bug ID: Document Foundation 91004 There are MSOffice documents that refer to "TmsRmn" and "Helv" fonts, and fontconfig doesn't suggest suitable replacements. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/82860 "TmsRmn and Helv ... We still have the exact same fonts, but now under the names MS Sans Serif and MS Serif" https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/68536 "Font Family Bitstream Canon Adobe HP ----------- --------- ----- ----- -- Swiss (Helv) Swiss Swiss Helvetica Universe Roman (Tms Rmn) Dutch Dutch Times Roman CG Times" So "Helv" == "MS Serif" and both could be added as part of the Helvetica group of mappings I guess and "Tms Rmn" == "MS Sans Serif" and both are presumably then suitable for mapping to the "Nimbus Roman No9 L"/"Times New Roman" targets ? -- 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=XYv5MApiTj&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ fonts-bugs mailing list fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/postorius/fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

2 4

[Bug 1446073] New: CVE-2017-8287 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_builder_close_contour function
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 22 Aug '17

22 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1446073 Bug ID: 1446073 Summary: CVE-2017-8287 freetype: heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_builder_close_contour 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 2017-03-26 has an out-of-bounds write caused by a heap-based buffer overflow related to the t1_builder_close_contour function in psaux/psobjs.c. Upstream patch: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/freetype/freetype2.git/commit/?id=3774fc0… Bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=941 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

1 6

[Bug 1397960] New: freetype-config --libtool prints path to non-existent libtool library file
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Aug '17

17 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1397960 Bug ID: 1397960 Summary: freetype-config --libtool prints path to non-existent libtool library file Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: freetype Severity: medium Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: jprajzne(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: behdad(a)fedoraproject.org, desktop-qa-list(a)redhat.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)tigcc.ticalc.org, mkasik(a)redhat.com, tpelka(a)redhat.com Depends On: 1368141 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368141 [Bug 1368141] freetype-config --libtool prints path to non-existent libtool library file -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 2

[Bug 1372368] New: freetype-2.6.5 and freetype-2.6.3 are ABI incompatible
by Red Hat Bugzilla 17 Aug '17

17 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1372368 Bug ID: 1372368 Summary: freetype-2.6.5 and freetype-2.6.3 are ABI incompatible Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: freetype Assignee: mkasik(a)redhat.com Reporter: rc040203(a)freenet.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: With freetype-2.6.5, some freetype-internal functions, which were publicly accessible before were made inaccessible, e.g. FT_New_GlyphSlot, FT_Done_GlyphSlot Due to the fact the SONAME was not changed and no mass-rebuild performed for fc25, this change at least broke Inventor (Inventor uses FT_Done_GlyphSlot). I haven't tried to check and therefore don't know if this affects more packages. fc25 ships an fc24-built Inventor which now contains a reference to an unresolvable symbol which used to be provided by freetype. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): freetype-2.6.5 Additional info: - Inventor clearly is at fault to use private functions from freetype, but it had been this way for more than ca. 15 years. - IMHO, it's arguable whether freetype's SONAME should have been changed. libfreetype.so.6.12.3 and libfreetype.so.6.12.5 definitely are ABI incompatible. - It's not clear to me, why freetype made FT_Done_GlyphSlot inaccessible, but left other similar functions public. - ATM, I do not see an alternative but to "steal" FT_Done_GlyphSlot code from freetype and to incorporate it into Inventor, to work-around Inventor's problem on fedora >= 25. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 3

[Bug 1110646] New: woff file missing on purpose?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 16 Aug '17

16 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1110646 Bug ID: 1110646 Summary: woff file missing on purpose? Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: fontawesome-fonts Assignee: pvoborni(a)redhat.com Reporter: tomspur(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pvoborni(a)redhat.com Description of problem: ipython shows this warning: 2014-06-16 20:47:56.421 [tornado.access] WARNING | 404 GET /static/components/font-awesome/font/fontawesome-webfont.woff?v=3.2.1 (127.0.0.1) 0.37ms referer=http://localhost:8888/static/style/style.min.css?v=7775081fa91df3822d16b2087bc2c8dd Would it be possible to also add the .woff file to fontawesome-webfont-web or is it left out on purpose? How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. open ipython-notebook Actual results: no fontawesome-webfont.woff Expected results: fontawesome-webfont.woff See also #1006575 for the ipython warning above. -- 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=dtK3lFi0PP&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 16

[Bug 1417250] New: Please upgrade to dejavu-fonts 2.37
by Red Hat Bugzilla 15 Aug '17

15 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417250 Bug ID: 1417250 Summary: Please upgrade to dejavu-fonts 2.37 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: dejavu-fonts Severity: medium Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: mcatanzaro(a)gnome.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, peter(a)thecodergeek.com, smaitra(a)redhat.com We have dejavu-fonts 2.35, but dejavu-fonts 2.37 is available. It should be upgraded! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 2

[Bug 1374074] New: 1px changes in line height from bold <-> non-bold breaks various websites
by Red Hat Bugzilla 08 Aug '17

08 Aug '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1374074 Bug ID: 1374074 Summary: 1px changes in line height from bold <-> non-bold breaks various websites Product: Fedora Version: 24 Component: liberation-fonts Severity: high Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: jonas(a)thiem.email 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 as packaged in Fedora can change line height by 1px as reported by fontconfig if switched from bold to non-bold or vice versa. This can break various sites displayed in web browsers, and for example all gitlab code listings viewed on Fedora only (works fine on Ubuntu, Archlinux, ...) aren't lining up properly because of this with the line numbers, which makes the whole thing look like a big mess. A more detailed analysis can be found here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1296856 Please note I'm not sure who is the best involved party to fix this and whether e.g. the website should fix it on their side, however I tried playing around with CSS line-height and so far I didn't manage to make it line up myself in the affected configurations (but I'm no CSS expert). Therefore I'm filing a bug here as well, hoping some font expert can shed some light on the issue. There is also a firefox bug report here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1296856 There is also a gitlab bug report here: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/20202 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Version : 1.07.4 Release : 7.fc24 How reproducible: 100% at affected font sizes Steps to Reproduce: 1. Run an affected configuration (Firefox Nightly on Fedora should work, possibly also regular Firefox stable as packaged in Fedora) at an affected web browser zoom level (100%/standard should work for firefox) 2. Visit a gitlab source code listing of more than just ~10 lines, e.g. https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/app/controllers/groups_… 3. Look how line numbers and lines match up Actual results: Line numbers are not matching up Expected results: Line numbers are matching up Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 2

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Older →

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs July 2017