4:33 p.m.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Bug ID: 2093080
Summary: Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
Product: Fedora
Version: 36
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: fontconfig
Severity: medium
Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com
Reporter: awilliam(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com,
fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
gnome-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mclasen(a)redhat.com,
pnemade(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com,
rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com,
tagoh(a)redhat.com
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
There's a test case:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts
which requires checking the default fonts for various languages against a list,
http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/fc-test.sh .
The current default fonts for Arabic installs do not match the list. The list
states sans should be DejaVu Sans, serif should be FreeSerif or MPH 2B Damase,
and mono should be DejaVu Sans Mono. These may have been changed recently, as
our openQA reference text file expects them to be Noto Naskh Arabic (for both
sans and serif?) and PakType Naskh Basic for mono.
In any case, what we actually see doesn't match either the list or the openQA
reference file. We see "Noto Sans Arabic" and "PakType Naqsh" in the
output
from the test, I think for serif (yes really) and monospace respectively.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
11:29 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whiteboard| |openqa
--- Comment #1 from Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> ---
This is the actual output we get, for sans, serif and monospace respectively:
NotoSansArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Sans Arabic" "Regular"
NotoNaskhArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Naskh Arabic" "Regular"
PakTypeNaqsh.ttf: "PakType Naqsh" "Regular"
That doesn't match anything I can see in the list. I gave the wrong link for
the list, sorry - it's
https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/fedora-current-defaultfonts.html .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
2:07 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #2 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Apparently that testcase is outdated. the latest one would be
https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/status/36.html though, it isn't reflected
packages from langpacks. I'm updating the list for other purpose. sorry for
inconvenience.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
11:58 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Red Hat One Jira (issues.redhat.com) <redhat-one-jira(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Link ID| |Red Hat Issue Tracker
| |FC-582
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
3:56 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |lruzicka(a)redhat.com
Flags| |needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com)
--- Comment #3 from Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Akira TAGOH from comment #2)
Apparently that testcase is outdated. the latest one would be
https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/status/36.html though, it isn't
reflected packages from langpacks. I'm updating the list for other purpose.
sorry for inconvenience.
Hello, coming back to this bug once again. We have this test failing again
because it seems that the font list on the system differs from what we
expected.
What the system tells us:
Sans -> NotoSansArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Sans Arabic" "Regular"
Serif -> NotoNaskhArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Naskh Arabic" "Regular"
Mono -> Vazirmatn[wght].ttf: "Vazirmatn" "Regular"
What the table provides and what we expect:
Sans -> NotoNaskhArabic-VF.ttf "Noto Naskh Arabic" "Regular"
Serif -> NotoNaskhArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Naskh Arabic" "Regular"
Mono -> PakTypeNaskhBasic.ttf: "PakType Naskh Basic" "Regular"
Can you tell us, what the correct combination is for Fedora 37 and if the
tables are correct, why there are different defaults on the installed system?
thanks.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
12:01 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #4 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
I have updated the test case. please check again.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
12:11 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com) |
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
2:46 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com)
--- Comment #5 from Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka(a)redhat.com> ---
So, I have checked again and I am still getting different results than
expected.
On a freshly installed system, I am getting these defaults:
NotoSansArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Sans Arabic" "Regular"
NotoNaskhArabic-VF.ttf: "Noto Naskh Arabic" "Regular"
Vazirmatn[wght].ttf: "Vazirmatn" "Regular"
However, the table linked to the suggested test case
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts) located at
https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/status/current.html
shows the following:
Noto Sans Arabic
Noto Naskh Arabic
KacstBook
While Serif and Sans font defaults do match, there is a difference in the Mono
default Vazirmatn versus KacstBook.
Please, make sure the correct fonts are used on the system or (if you wish so)
update the table to match the reality.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
6:40 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com) |
--- Comment #6 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
How did you install that?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
8:44 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #7 from Lukas Ruzicka <lruzicka(a)redhat.com> ---
The Server DVD is used to start the Anaconda in which I choose to install
Fedora Workstation, after the installation the system is rebooted and the test
is performed.
The test run is here: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1540613
You can see the Video from that test here:
https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/1540613/video?filename=video.ogv
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
12:25 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #8 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Well, the table was generated with all the langpacks installed. if the result
of the test case is different, it would means there are some font packages
which affects default fonts for other languages accidentally. that is a bug in
those fonts packages.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
1:24 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #9 from Ben Cotton <bcotton(a)redhat.com> ---
This message is a reminder that Fedora Linux 36 is nearing its end of life.
Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora Linux 36 on
2023-05-16.
It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer
maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with
a
'version' of '36'.
Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, change the 'version'
to a later Fedora Linux version. Note that the version field may be hidden.
Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see it.
Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora Linux 36 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora Linux, you are encouraged to change the 'version' to a later version
prior to this bug being closed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
7:02 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version|36 |rawhide
--- Comment #10 from Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> ---
Still an issue in current Rawhide.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
11:54 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #11 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> ---
See for example current
https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/status/38-diff-comps-vs-langpacks.html
So the results vary depending whether the related langpacks are installed or
not.
We have some major plans in the pipeline for how we install default fonts for
F39,
so it may be better to revisit this thereafter (during this cycle).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
11:57 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #12 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> ---
Also for QA release testing it might be enough to focus mainly on Sans results
across all languages for now?
This could then be extended to Serif once that hopefully stabilizes
(for a lot of scripts Mono is less meaningful anyway).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
3:29 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #13 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Sorry for taking a long time on it. I have updated
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts too.
Particularly speaking of this case, paktype-naskh-basic-fonts (and
kacst-book-fonts in f38 too) affected vazirmatn-fonts which is our default
font. we need a fix for them not to make them higher priority than
vazirmatn-fonts.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
5:09 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
Last Closed| |2024-03-07 11:09:50
--- Comment #15 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Please use this instead:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_default_font_installation
No difference is reported for ar locale on f40:
$ fontquery-diff -l ar 40
* Comparison between 40 and local
* This may take some time...
Language default sans default serif
default mono
Arabic(ar) Noto Sans Arabic Noto Naskh Arabic
Vazirmatn
FWIW if there are some difference detected, it looks like:
$ fontquery-diff -l he 40
* Comparison between 40 and local
* This may take some time...
Language default sans default serif
default mono
- Hebrew(he) Noto Sans Hebrew Noto Serif Hebrew
Noto Sans Hebrew
+
Liberation Mono
As known as Bug#2267629
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...
2:01 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com)
--- Comment #16 from Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> ---
Thanks for that, but now it's a bit confusing. We have both
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts and
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_default_font_installation . Does
QA:Testcase_default_font_installation completely replace
QA:Testcase_i18n_default_fonts ? Should I update the validation pages to use
the newer test, and rewrite the openQA test to do what it says?
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...
4:49 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com) |
--- Comment #17 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Yes, please! Sorry for confusing.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...
6:46 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #18 from Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> ---
OK. How does this tool work, exactly? It seems to be comparing the local system
against a container image, right? How is the container image generated? How do
we make sure that *it* is correct? I'm worried about a situation where a bug is
introduced into Fedora somehow which will cause *both* the reference container
image *and* the clean installed system that openQA tests from to be wrong, in
which case they'd match and the script would report no error?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...
6:52 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 2093080] Default fonts for Arabic do not match the font
packages list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
--- Comment #19 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
Yes, this assumes that default-fonts metapackages from langpacks provides
expected default fonts.
If fontquery reports some difference between local and container image, that
would means some font packages which may be pulled in by other deps affected
default fonts. I'd say that may be more or less a bug.
For example, taking a look at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267629, we see difference for
Hebrew monospace which isn't expected in langpacks.
If we use liberation-mono-fonts as default monospace for Hebrew, we need to
update langpacks. If we want to see Noto Sans Hebrew as default monospace, we
should add substitute config in google-noto-fonts then.
For more details of fontquery, the container image is generated by
https://github.com/fedora-i18n/fontquery/blob/main/fontquery/data/Contain...
and
https://github.com/fedora-i18n/fontquery/blob/main/fontquery/scripts/font...
for real package installation.
There are three variants for images though, minimal would be the same to what
we usually have on the system. others are basically to test consistency in
config proactively.
The container images are supposed to be updated weekly by GitHub Actions. If
something failed, images won't be updated.
As this relies on langpacks, we need to pay more attentions on updating
langpacks to avoid breakage right.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2093080
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...
41
days inactive
693
days old
fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org
20 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com