Re: fontforge in f15

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le Dim 20 mars 2011 17:50, Kevin Fenzi a écrit :
>  Greetings.
>
>  Currently we are shipping fontforge-20100501 in f15.
>
>  fontforge-20110222 is available (and in rawhide).
>
>  What would folks think about updating f15?
>  It's a bugfix release, so I wouldn't expect any big issues, but I thought I
would check with everyone before doing so.
>  http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/changelog.html#change-log
>  has a list of changes. 
That would be nice but I'd really like the existing font packages to be
rebuilt against this version to make sure there is no regression and someone
who tries to rebuild a fedora font package with the fedora fontconfig gets the
same results as us.

And that needs someone to notify package owners, give them the time to rebuild
their packages if they want to, rebuild in their stead otherwise.

BTW : it's really nice to see all the fontconfig bugs squashed upstream those
past months because Fedora people reported them (sometimes with patches), keep
up the good work!

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

fontforge in f15

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:22:30 +0100
"Nicolas Mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net&gt; wrote:

>  That would be nice but I'd really like the existing font packages
> to
>  be rebuilt against this version to make sure there is no regression
>  and someone who tries to rebuild a fedora font package with the
>  fedora fontconfig gets the same results as us. 
Sure, thats the hard part. ;) 

>  And that needs someone to notify package owners, give them the time
>  to rebuild their packages if they want to, rebuild in their stead
>  otherwise. 
Do we have a handly list or workflow for this? 

Would someone be willing to take this on? 

>  BTW : it's really nice to see all the fontconfig bugs squashed
>  upstream those past months because Fedora people reported them
>  (sometimes with patches), keep up the good work! 
Agreed! :) 

kevin

fontforge in f15

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le Lun 21 mars 2011 17:23, Kevin Fenzi a écrit :
>  On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:22:30 +0100
>  "Nicolas Mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net&gt; wrote:
>  
> > And that needs someone to notify package owners, give them the
> time
> > to rebuild their packages if they want to, rebuild in their stead
> > otherwise.
>
>  Do we have a handly list or workflow for this? 
Not really, it would be nice to formalize something in the wiki to avoid
reinventing the process each time.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

fontforge in f15

[Paul Flo Williams]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > That would be nice but I'd really like the existing font packages to
> > be rebuilt against this version to make sure there is no regression
> > and someone who tries to rebuild a fedora font package with the
> > fedora fontconfig gets the same results as us.
>
> > And that needs someone to notify package owners, give them the time
> > to rebuild their packages if they want to, rebuild in their stead
> > otherwise.
>
>  Do we have a handly list or workflow for this?
>
>  Would someone be willing to take this on? 
repoquery suggests there are 50-odd source packages requiring FontForge. I
don't know how to do this "properly", but as a local test (on F14) I will
build and install rawhide's FF and do this loop

1. yumdownloader --source font.src.rpm
2. rpm -i font.src.rpm
3. rpmbuild -bb pkg.spec

That sounds like something I can leave until cooked, which means it can be
done as regularly as required.

I assume that rebuilding other people's packages is a job for a
provenpackager, so I'll leave that to someone else when we know what the
damage is.

-- 
Paul Flo Williams
http://hisdeedsaredust.com/category/fonts/feed

fontforge in f15

[Paul Flo Williams]

OK, as a first step at checking, I've built FontForge 20110222 on F14 and
rebuilt the 42 font packages that BuildRequire it. There may be fonts
added for F15 only that I've missed, but we can pick those up later.

I've dumped all the build logs at http://hisdeedsaredust.com/test/

oflb-goudy-bookletter-1911-fonts doesn't use FF at the moment. The spec
file says that this is because of a python failure, so the package just
ships the pre-built OTF.

As far as I can see, none of the others failed to build, though there are
a number of packages which produce warnings:

beteckna-fonts
 FindMatchinHVEdge didn't
 Bad sfd file (glyph width warnings)

linux-libertine-fonts
 SplinePointListIsClockwise: Found error (multiple times)
 Failed to find NameList: LinLibertine-2.6.8

oflb-riordonfancy-fonts
 MonotonicFindAlong: Never found our spline. (x2)

thai-scalable-fonts
 FindMatchinHVEdge didn't
 MonotonicFindAlong: Ran out of intersections.

Now I'll go back to F14's FontForge (20100510), rebuild these four and
compare the TTFs.

-- 
Paul Flo Williams
http://hisdeedsaredust.com/category/fonts/feed

fontforge in f15

[Paul Flo Williams]

I wrote:
>  As far as I can see, none of the others failed to build, though there are
>  a number of packages which produce warnings:
>
>  beteckna-fonts
>  linux-libertine-fonts
>  oflb-riordonfancy-fonts
>  thai-scalable-fonts
>
>  Now I'll go back to F14's FontForge (20100510), rebuild these four and
>  compare the TTFs. 
Sorry, I'd have written just one message if I'd known it'd be this easy:
all four packages produce exactly the same warnings when built with
FontForge 20100501-7.fc14, so no need to compare TTFs.

I think that means we should update FontForge in F15 and invite people to
rebuild, in the knowledge that it'll all just work?

-- 
Paul Flo Williams
http://hisdeedsaredust.com/category/fonts/feed

fontforge in f15

[Dave Crossland]

On 22 March 2011 11:20, Paul Flo Williams <paul(a)frixxon.co.uk&gt; wrote:
>  I think that means we should update FontForge in F15 and invite
> people to
>  rebuild, in the knowledge that it'll all just work? 
SGTM :)