[Bug 481068] New: fc-cache install errors

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: fc-cache install errors

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Summary: fc-cache install errors
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: low
         Component: bitmap-fonts
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
            Blocks: 446452
    Classification: Fedora
    Target Release: ---

Description of problem:
When bitmap-fonts gets installed there are a bunch of fc-cache errors appearing
in rawhide.

bitmap-fonts needs to be updated to the latest packaging guidelines and macros.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
bitmap-fonts-0.3-6.fc10

How reproducible:
every time

Steps to Reproduce:
1. spin Live

Actual results:
  Installing: bitmap-fonts                 #####################
[727/950]/usr/share/fonts: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/VLGothic: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/abyssinica: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/bitmap-fonts: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/cjkunifonts: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/default: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/dejavu: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/jomolhari: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/kacst: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/khmeros: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lklug: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-bengali: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-gujarati: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-hindi: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-kannada: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-maithili: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-oriya: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-punjabi: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-tamil: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/lohit-telugu: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/mathml: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/padauk: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/paktype: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/stix: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/thaifonts-scalable: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/un-core: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/zh_CN: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/zh_TW: failed to write cache
/usr/share/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType: failed to write cache
error: %post(bitmap-fonts-0.3-6.fc10.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 32

Expected results:
Should not fail with error 32

Additional info:
Actual above errors are probably due to fontconfig error, but install should
not fail anyway.

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Jens Petersen  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|446452                      |446451
            Summary|fc-cache install errors     |bitmap-fonts needs updating
                   |                            |to revised packaging
                   |                            |guidelines

--- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen   2009-01-22 18:39:51 EDT ---
Fontconfig got fixed but the package still needs updating to the new macros I
think.

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Jens Petersen  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|446451(F11Target)           |

--- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen   2009-04-07 01:54:59 EDT ---
This is going to miss F11 - dropping from F11Target.

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Pravin Satpute  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]         |[e-mail]

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Jens Petersen  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Matej Cepl  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |473303(F12Blocker)

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Matej Cepl  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |225617

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #4 from Pravin Satpute   2009-09-11 07:38:17 EDT ---
ok, i will work on this next week

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Matej Cepl  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|11                          |rawhide

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #5 from Matej Cepl   2009-09-21 04:22:50 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> ok, i will work on this next week

ping?

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #6 from Pravin Satpute   2009-09-21 05:36:09 EDT ---
http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/bitmap-fonts-0.3-9.fc11.src.rpm
http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/bitmap-fonts.spec

i think it need review as it is very basic package and its merge-review is also
pending

can someone review it?

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-09-21 05:54:54 EDT ---
I'll look at it this evening

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Nicolas Mailhot  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |needinfo?

--- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-09-21 17:42:02 EDT ---
Well fc-scan shows that most of the bdf files declare themselves as "Fixed",
two of them think they are "Fangsong ti" and the others are not parsable by
fc-scan.

So you need at minimum a

1. a foo-fixed-fonts subpackage, 
2. a foo-fangsong-ti-fonts subpackage, 
3. and get Behdad to look at the other files and tell you if it's a bug his
side or if the files need some form of fixing. Fontconfig won't be able to use
them if it can't read the font name inside. The readme says they are Lucida but
fontconfig does not read readmes.

Also
- it would be probably cleaner to package the ucs fonts in a ucs-fixed-fonts
package instead of hiding their origin in a collection package
- the licensing of Fangsong ti needs to be extracted from the fonts in a .txt
people can actually read.

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Nicolas Mailhot  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?                   |

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #9 from Pravin Satpute   2009-09-22 01:42:43 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> a foo-fangsong-ti-fonts subpackage,

bitmap-cjk-fonts has only fansongti fonts file, should we change it name?
like bitmap-cjk-fangsongti-fonts
> Also
> it would be probably cleaner to package the ucs fonts in a ucs-fixed-fonts
>
> package instead of hiding their origin in a collection package

can you elaborate more on this, which font exactly?

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen   2009-09-22 01:51:53 EDT ---
As I commented in the merge review (and this still needs
proper checking) but most bdf fonts already seem to be in
xorg-x11-fonts - so I am starting wonder if this package
could just be dropped become fangsongti-fonts?

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-09-22 01:55:34 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > a foo-fangsong-ti-fonts subpackage,
>
> bitmap-cjk-fonts has only fansongti fonts file, should we change it name?
> like bitmap-cjk-fangsongti-fonts

I'd not mention the cjk bit at all
> > Also
> > it would be probably cleaner to package the ucs fonts in a ucs-fixed-fonts
> >
> > package instead of hiding their origin in a collection package
>
> can you elaborate more on this, which font exactly?

The readme says fixed is a copy of 
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ucs-fonts.html

If we packaged it today it'd end up in a ucs-fonts or 
ucs-fixed-fonts srpm, not something else entirely.

Also as Jens wrote we need to de-duplicate with xorg-x11-fonts, but
xorg-x11-fonts is another package that needs reorganisation

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot   2009-09-22 02:38:19 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> and get Behdad to look at the other files and tell you if it's a bug his
>
> side or if the files need some form of fixing. Fontconfig won't be able to use
> them if it can't read the font name inside. The readme says they are Lucida but
> fontconfig does not read readmes.

BTW due to a mock bug I checked the files in the srpm, not the files in the
built rpm, so it may be that this is already fixed as part of the current build
process (need to check the existing repo-font-audit tool for what it says about
this package)

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #13 from Pravin Satpute   2009-09-29 05:29:03 EDT ---
sorry for bit late update

fc-scan works fine on all *.pcf files

i have done suggested changes updated spec and srpm are as follows

http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/bitmap-fonts/bitmap-fonts.spec
http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/bitmap-fonts/bitmap-fonts-0.3-10.fc11.src.rp...

also created a new package request for ucs-fixed-fonts

bug 526204

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

--- Comment #14 from Pravin Satpute   2009-09-30 03:41:46 EDT ---
i have build bitmap-fonts-0_3-9_fc12, with spec submitted in comment #6

better to do update bitmap-fonts with merge review for F13 and also looks good
to close this f12-blocker bug and do discussion on Merge Review on bug 225617

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Pravin Satpute  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |MODIFIED

--- Comment #15 from Pravin Satpute   2009-10-05 05:20:59 EDT ---
bitmap-fonts-0.3-9.fc12 successfully moved from dist-f12-updates-candidate into
dist-f12

[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068

Pravin Satpute  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|MODIFIED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |RAWHIDE

--- Comment #16 from Pravin Satpute   2009-10-09 01:55:05 EDT ---
if any problem reopen bug