https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823637
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com) |
--- Comment #15 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Sorry for late response, I was away from my computer for a while.
(In reply to Hans Ulrich Niedermann from comment #14)
> Let me try to summarize this bug's discussions with my limited understanding
> of the font software stack:
>
> 1. The original poster mainly had an issue with fontconfig/ostree which
> resulted in his gnome-terminal dialog showing only small rectangular glyphs
> instead of "Terminus Medium", "Terminus Bold", and the
> invented-by-the-software-stack "Terminus Bold Italic". This appears to have
> been solved over in fontconfig/ostree land, so the main part of this bug
> looks like a duplicate of
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750891 to me, and definitively
> outside the scope of what the terminus-fonts package is responsible for.
Not exactly. this isn't ostree specific. when system has same font families in
different formats, fontconfig prioritize them from various aspects though,
FC_FONTFORMAT which is a priperty in cacche containing the font format is one
of factors. but it do compare strings so far. so there are the case that
fontconfig returns a bitmap font as the best font instead of OpenType and
applications didn't just support the synthethic emboldening for such fonts.
I thought so far fontconfig could intentionally gives a lower priority to
bitmap fonts than OpenType fonts though, someone may also intentionally wants
to use bitmap fonts rather than OpenType fonts. I need to think about how to
implement it. thus, conditionally installing one of them in the packaging level
was a workaround.
> 2. The original poster also had a completely different issue with what
> Akira TAGOH calls Pango/freetype in which the presence of *.pcf.gz files
> breaks the "Terminus Italic" invented by what appears to be pango/freetype.
> As this issue has been reappearing and is going to reappear until the last
> piece of software using pre-pango font rendering has disappeared from at
> least Fedora, if not the planet, I have created
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827905 to track that part. So
> the secondary part of this bug looks like a duplicate of 1827905 to me.
Right. but that "the secondary part" is actually main thing for this. the
comment#1 and relevant comments were the off-topic for this.
> Akira TAGOH, sorry to bother you again here, but you appear to be the one
> with the knowledge to actually help with this. I would not even know where
> to start reading documentation.
Sorry for that. that is one of my tasks I need to improve fontconfig
documentation.
> You have mentioned above "Disable embolden flag for certain apps". Where
> would this flag be located? And in this case, terminus-fonts already
> provides "Terminus Medium" and "Terminus Bold", so I cannot se where
> "embolden" should play a part here, but might there be a "italicize" flag
> somewhere? Maybe an "italicizes flag for certain fonts"? That could prevent
> the secondary issue number 2.
Well, enumerating everything in config isn't actually realistic but one could
do for example (not tested):
<match>
<test name="family"><string>Terminus</string></test>
<test name="prgname"><string>gnome-terminal</string></test>
<edit name="fontformat" mode="prepend"><string>TrueType</string></edit>
</match>
As I commented for 1., this should be fixed/improved in fontconfig as well...
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1833719
Bug ID: 1833719
Summary: Please consider adding Monoid font
Product: Fedora
Version: 32
Status: NEW
Component: liberation-fonts
Assignee: vishalvijayraghavan(a)gmail.com
Reporter: luke.hutch(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com,
fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
gnome-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mclasen(a)redhat.com,
petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com,
rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com,
sandmann(a)redhat.com, vishalvijayraghavan(a)gmail.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Please consider adding the MIT/SIL-licensed monospace font Monoid to Fedora:
https://github.com/larsenwork/monoid
(I don't see a relevant component to add this bug to -- sorry to file it
against liberation-fonts)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1767499
Bug ID: 1767499
Summary: Very bad kerning for Tahoma in Fedora 31
Product: Fedora
Version: 31
Status: NEW
Component: pango
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: aros(a)gmx.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com,
fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
gnome-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mclasen(a)redhat.com,
pwu(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com,
rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com,
tagoh(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Created attachment 1631087
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1631087&action=edit
Tahoma as rendered by Pango 1.44 in Fedora 31
This is how Tahoma font is rendered in Fedora 31.
After downgrading to pango-1.43.0-4.fc30.x86_64.rpm the issue disappears.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1829451
Bug ID: 1829451
Summary: fonttools-4.9.0 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
Component: fonttools
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee: pnemade(a)redhat.com
Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
pnemade(a)redhat.com, sshedmak(a)redhat.com,
tagoh(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Latest upstream release: 4.9.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 4.8.1-1.fc33
URL: https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools/
Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/
More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823637
Hans Ulrich Niedermann <rhbugs(a)n-dimensional.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com)
--- Comment #14 from Hans Ulrich Niedermann <rhbugs(a)n-dimensional.de> ---
Let me try to summarize this bug's discussions with my limited understanding of
the font software stack:
1. The original poster mainly had an issue with fontconfig/ostree which
resulted in his gnome-terminal dialog showing only small rectangular glyphs
instead of "Terminus Medium", "Terminus Bold", and the
invented-by-the-software-stack "Terminus Bold Italic". This appears to have
been solved over in fontconfig/ostree land, so the main part of this bug looks
like a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1750891 to me,
and definitively outside the scope of what the terminus-fonts package is
responsible for.
2. The original poster also had a completely different issue with what Akira
TAGOH calls Pango/freetype in which the presence of *.pcf.gz files breaks the
"Terminus Italic" invented by what appears to be pango/freetype. As this issue
has been reappearing and is going to reappear until the last piece of software
using pre-pango font rendering has disappeared from at least Fedora, if not the
planet, I have created https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827905 to
track that part. So the secondary part of this bug looks like a duplicate of
1827905 to me.
Akira TAGOH, sorry to bother you again here, but you appear to be the one with
the knowledge to actually help with this. I would not even know where to start
reading documentation.
You have mentioned above "Disable embolden flag for certain apps". Where would
this flag be located? And in this case, terminus-fonts already provides
"Terminus Medium" and "Terminus Bold", so I cannot se where "embolden" should
play a part here, but might there be a "italicize" flag somewhere? Maybe an
"italicizes flag for certain fonts"? That could prevent the secondary issue
number 2.
Also, is there a third issue discussed in this bug which I have completely
overlooked?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815128
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
FEDORA-2020-4463b97145 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing
--advisory=FEDORA-2020-4463b97145`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4463b97145
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1815128
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
FEDORA-2020-4463b97145 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4463b97145
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822847
--- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> ---
This review cycle does not reflect reality.
When the review is done as fedora-review+, the rest of the work is
requester-side, not reviewer-side
When the review is done as fedora-review-, again the fixing work is
requester-side, not reviewer-side
Practically, unless the requester is available to act on the review result at
once, no reviewer is going to commit following the result of the review months
if not years later (yes some of those are *that* old).
Thus, the only state during which it is correct to assign stuff on the
reviewer, is when the reviewer has taken the review but not finished it yet
(fedora-review?). The rest of the time the only person that can make things
move forward is the requester.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1822847
--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar <ppisar(a)redhat.com> ---
A review has a life cycle. When someone stars reviewing a package, he should
assign the bug to himself, change the status to assigned and set fedora-review
flag to "?". Once a package is approved, the bug report keeps assigned to the
reviewer and when the submitter builds the package, the submitter closed the
bug or attaches is it to a Bodhi updates so that the bug report gets closed.
Recently, a review status listing
<https://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/> for updated to reflect and
enforce the review life cycle. So I'm going through a list of reviews in an
inconsistent state and correcting them. My change in the review was exactly one
of the corrections. Nothing particular against this package.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.