[Fedora-fonts-list] Fonts spec template validation

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Hi all,

While the current spec template in the Fonts SIG wiki
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Packaging/SpecTemplate) only
documents common Fedora Fonts packaging practices, it's never been
formally approved.

I intend to submit it to FPC soon.

If anyone on the fonts list object to part of this page or wants
something clarified, please speak now

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

[Jens-Ulrik Petersen]

Nicolas Mailhot さんは書きました:
>  While the current spec template in the Fonts SIG wiki
>  (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Packaging/SpecTemplate) only
>  documents common Fedora Fonts packaging practices, it's never been
>  formally approved. 
Just a minor quibble, but I would rather %fontdir and %fontconfdir do 
not end in '/'.

One thing that is missing currently is the use of mkfontdir and ttmkfdir 
(or mkfontscale) to generate fonts.dir and fonts.scale even for truetype 
fonts.  When we split out various CJK fonts from the fonts-* packages 
for F8 we moved that from %post to %install and keep fonts from 
different packages in separate directories.  See for example sazanami-fonts.

Jens

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le jeudi 25 octobre 2007 à 12:17 +1000, Jens Petersen a écrit :
>  Nicolas Mailhot さんは書きました:
>  > While the current spec template in the Fonts SIG wiki
>  > (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Packaging/SpecTemplate) only
>  > documents common Fedora Fonts packaging practices, it's never been
>  > formally approved.
>  
>  Just a minor quibble, but I would rather %fontdir and %fontconfdir do 
>  not end in '/'. 
I have no strong feelings one way or another, existing rpm directoy
macros are somewhat unconsistent on this (buildroot is /-terminated,
other not), I've already changed it both ways several times, it's not
problem to change it again.

>  One thing that is missing currently is the use of mkfontdir and
> ttmkfdir 
>  (or mkfontscale) to generate fonts.dir and fonts.scale even for truetype 
>  fonts.  When we split out various CJK fonts from the fonts-* packages 
>  for F8 we moved that from %post to %install and keep fonts from 
>  different packages in separate directories.  See for example sazanami-fonts. 
I'll let packagers of those examples to complete the template. As long
as core fonts stuff is clearly marked optional (with a specific colour
and text explaining it should not be added to new font packages). 

When Vera was added to Fedora years ago the xorg maintainer and desktop
team strongly objected to adding new fonts to the legacy subsystem, and
my own experience is they were right — fonts that have been used a long
time with the core fonts backend tend to work, new fonts tend to expose
many bugs no one wants to fix anymore.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 19:37 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>  
>  When Vera was added to Fedora years ago the xorg maintainer and desktop
>  team strongly objected to adding new fonts to the legacy subsystem, and
>  my own experience is they were right — fonts that have been used a long
>  time with the core fonts backend tend to work, new fonts tend to expose
>  many bugs no one wants to fix anymore. 
Yes, please no legacy font system crap.

My only comment on the SpecTemplate is that with new fontconfig in
rawhide, there's no need to force fc-cache anymore.

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
 Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
        -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le vendredi 02 novembre 2007 à 20:09 -0400, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :

>  Yes, please no legacy font system crap. 
Documented in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FontsPolicy

>  My only comment on the SpecTemplate is that with new fontconfig in
>  rawhide, there's no need to force fc-cache anymore. 
Added to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FontsSpecTemplate

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

[Fedora-fonts-list] Re: Fonts SIG packaging policies validation

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Hi all,

Everyone had a week to have his say and complete the files, and I've
submitted the pages to FPC for approval

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/DraftsTodo

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot