i18n-bugs February 2023

i18n-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
125 discussions

[Bug 2095964] New: [abrt] ibus-typing-booster: _cairo_spline_decompose_into(): python3.10 killed by SIGSEGV
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Feb '23

14 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095964 Bug ID: 2095964 Summary: [abrt] ibus-typing-booster: _cairo_spline_decompose_into(): python3.10 killed by SIGSEGV Product: Fedora Version: 36 Hardware: x86_64 Status: NEW Whiteboard: abrt_hash:2104ae08f8add1a3508578f46afd328904cf0c5f;VAR IANT_ID=workstation; Component: ibus-typing-booster Assignee: mfabian(a)redhat.com Reporter: mfabian(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: anish.developer(a)gmail.com, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mfabian(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component: ibus-typing-booster-2.15.27-1.fc36 Additional info: reporter: libreport-2.17.1 backtrace_rating: 4 cgroup: 0::/user.slice/user-1000.slice/user@1000.service/session.slice/org.freedesktop.IBus.session.GNOME.service cmdline: /usr/bin/python /usr/share/ibus-typing-booster/setup/main.py crash_function: _cairo_spline_decompose_into executable: /usr/bin/python3.10 journald_cursor: s=d60f71b9c5714507ad521e587b3c1f0d;i=1248;b=dd038a3840c74507a58b652d3fc610f5;m=432f3ff97;t=5e118b88e9096;x=d66e6beb9878ecc kernel: 5.17.13-300.fc36.x86_64 rootdir: / runlevel: N 5 type: CCpp uid: 1000 Truncated backtrace: Thread no. 1 (1 frames) #0 _cairo_spline_decompose_into at ../src/cairo-spline.c:252 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2095964

1 1

[Bug 2165332] New: Please update ddskk to 17.1 in Fedora 37 & 36
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 09 Feb '23

09 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165332 Bug ID: 2165332 Summary: Please update ddskk to 17.1 in Fedora 37 & 36 Product: Fedora Version: 37 Status: NEW Component: emacs-common-ddskk Assignee: dueno(a)redhat.com Reporter: dan.cermak(a)cgc-instruments.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: dueno(a)redhat.com, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Link ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 2118205 Classification: Fedora Description of problem: It appears that ddskk 16.2 is causing issues with Emacs 28.2 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2118205) I think that ddskk 17.1 resolves this problem. Can you please build it F37 & F36? Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. dnf install emacs emacs-common-ddskk 2. run emacs 3. `Cannot open load file: No such file or directory, comp` is displayed in the *Messages* buffer. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2165332

1 6

[Bug 2155237] Need .conf files for Noto Sans Mono CJK and Noto Serif CJK
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 09 Feb '23

09 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2155237 Peng Wu <pwu(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-02-09 06:36:39 --- Comment #1 from Peng Wu <pwu(a)redhat.com> --- The .conf files are added to the new font packages. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Noto_CJK_Variable_Fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2155237

1 0

[Bug 2139277] update CJK Sans/Mono to 2.004 and Serif to 2.001 with variable fonts
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 09 Feb '23

09 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2139277 Peng Wu <pwu(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-02-09 06:32:04 --- Comment #2 from Peng Wu <pwu(a)redhat.com> --- The new font packages are built for Fedora 38. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Noto_CJK_Variable_Fonts -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2139277

1 0

[Bug 2129399] Postscript standard symbol font is not looked up correctly
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 08 Feb '23

08 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399 --- Comment #31 from rgb(a)phy.duke.edu --- Well, I read the fonts-conf documentation and examples pretty thoroughly, installed font-manager so I could see the fonts themselves, and there are many, many font sets on the system that contain the requisite characters. It is very difficult to tell which one is causing the problem or how to replace it. I spent two hours trying variations on your <alias> section including <match> statements, replacing the various systems fond initialization steps, etc. It sadly remains the case that while I can display my unembedded test file on a scientific linux box in the department and it renders perfectly (over X) when I try to look at exactly the same file on Fedora it has nothing but boxes. My embedded font ps2pdf version of the same file displays everywhere. I agree that it is probably something in /etc/fonts/fonts.conf and/or /etc/fonts/conf.d/[??]whatever-symbol-font-isn't-working.conf and that just the right override might fix it, that requires diffing and checking around 100+ files, most of which are certainly irrelevant, looking for a possibly significant change in an XML that I don't completely understand to see which one works correctly on scientific linux (a RH base IIRC) but not on Fedora (another RH base). I could maybe install a Centos VM to test -- I don't have a RH license on any personal systems, obviously. The possibility remains that it is a change in evince itself as well. This I can't really test -- obviously, if I copy over a binary from the system where it works it has the wrong libraries on my laptop, and mucking around at the library level is an open invitation to having to do a hard reinstall (been there, done that:-). Right now I HAVE to go back to my regular work and write a quiz for my physics students with (sigh) embedded fonts and so far I nothing I've done has fundamentally broken font rendering per se, but in any event no, the alias above does not work whether or not it is font.conf or 0-symbol.conf. The documentation suggests that the former is the right place for it -- and I could verify that this file was indeed being parsed in real time as I made changes as errors were instantly reported in tty's containing rendered fonts -- but the latter seems like it might only be scanned at boot or login time, since the leading 00 (if I understand things) represents the order in which the file configs are layered at startup. I >>think<< the system rereads this ever 30 seconds by default so it shouldn't matter, but again -- no time to test, an incredibly complex system and syntax, and crappy tools for manipulating it or even displaying it. Font-manager is the best I've found, but I don't know if it can be used to rewrite rules yet (or if it is wise to trust it while doing so). Sorry. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399

1 0

[Bug 2129399] Postscript standard symbol font is not looked up correctly
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 08 Feb '23

08 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399 --- Comment #30 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- Sorry, my words weren't enough. Well, you may need to write a config like the above but replace DejaVu Sans to any of them. Unfortunately just installing them doesn't help right. I'm asking what is sufficient for alternatives of Symbol font. Please put the following config into $HOME/.config/fontconfig/conf.d/0-symbol.conf and replacing FONTNAME to any of "Noto Sans Symbols", "Noto Sans Symbols 2", "Symbola". <fontconfig> <alias> <family>Symbol</family> <default><family>FONTNAME</family></default> </alias> </fontconfig> This will makes fontconfig to pick up any of them as alternatives to Symbol. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399

1 0

[Bug 2129399] Postscript standard symbol font is not looked up correctly
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 07 Feb '23

07 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399 --- Comment #29 from rgb(a)phy.duke.edu --- Doesn't work with any or all of these three installed, sorry. So far, the only solution I've found that consistently works is embedding fonts with e.g. ps2pdf -dPDFSETTINGS=/printer solutions-for-week.ps so that's in all of my work Makefiles. It is still a problem, though, that hasn't gone away. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129399

1 0

[Bug 2166813] Rename Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 07 Feb '23

07 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166813 --- Comment #10 from Parag Nemade <pnemade(a)redhat.com> --- Thank you for your detailed comment here. Sometimes I feel though we promote building fonts from source files, it creates problems in Fedora as depending components gets updated at different times. I experienced 1 or 2 times in the past that fontforge when updated in Fedora failed to generate font file where I patched that font's sfd file for some glyph fix. In other instance it simply failed to generate font using fontforge script. Upstream for this font has not been responsive ever since they uploaded/created repo at github. Let's hope we get some reply there soon. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166813

1 0

[Bug 2166813] Rename Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 07 Feb '23

07 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166813 --- Comment #9 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> --- Thanks for the fixes. Using FontForge: Caladea - https://fonts.google.com/download?family=Caladea Ascent: 800 Descent: 200 Em Size: 1000 Underline position: -100 Height: 50 Caladea - http://gsdview.appspot.com/chromeos-localmirror/distfiles/crosextrafonts-20… Ascent: 778 Descent: 222 Em Size: 1000 Underline position: -89 Height: 57 Caladea - GitHub Ascent: 800 Descent: 200 Em Size: 1000 Underline position: -100 Height: 50 Source info at https://github.com/huertatipografica/Caladea/blob/master/sources/ufo/Calade… has Ascent: 778 Descent: -222 Em Size: 1000 Underline position: -89 Height: 57 This is not what is in the ttf files on GitHub. So something has been changed when generating the newer ttf files. FontForge could be used to regenerate ttf files: https://fontforge.org/docs/tutorial/editexample7.html Not sure if kerning information has been changed. Updated https://github.com/huertatipografica/Caladea/issues/4 Still need python3-attrs to package fontmake https://github.com/googlefonts/fontmake which maybe easier to use to generate ttf files -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2166813

1 0

[Bug 2164212] New: paps-0.7.9 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 07 Feb '23

07 Feb '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164212 Bug ID: 2164212 Summary: paps-0.7.9 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: paps Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 0.7.9 Upstream release that is considered latest: 0.7.9 Current version/release in rawhide: 0.7.1-7.fc38 URL: http://github.com/dov/paps 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_M… 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/2592/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/paps -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2164212

1 3

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

i18n-bugs February 2023