[Bug 434753] New: Sometimes can't display VLGothic via "sansserif" family.
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434753
Summary: Sometimes can't display VLGothic via "sansserif" family.
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: low
Priority: low
Component: VLGothic-fonts
AssignedTo: ryo-dairiki(a)users.sourceforge.net
ReportedBy: mmk9060(a)aol.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com,tagoh(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
Since I installed "VLGothic-proportional" and "Dejavu LGC Sans" fonts, Japanese
characters have not been displayed correctly and displayed "□", called "tofu"
characters, in Flash, gxine, and etc. I found out that this problem occur
because VLG's config file in /etc/fonts/conf.d compete against Dejavu's that.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
VLGothic-fonts-proportional-20071215-2.fc8
dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.19-1
How reproducible:
Always in particular situation.
Steps to Reproduce:
Use particular applications. Example, Flash(you may make it sure by "Rightclick
- Settings") and gxine.
Actual results:
Displayed tofus.
Expected results:
Readable Japanese characters with VLGothic fonts displayed.
Additional info:
We discussed about this problem in "Fedora Users Community Japan". Following is
the link to our discussion in BBS. We hope you find it informative:
http://fedora-jp.sourceforge.jp/modules/d3forum/index.php?topic_id=75
And I made a RPM package which will resolve this problem. I will attach it.
------- Additional Comments From mmk9060(a)aol.com 2008-02-25 04:27 EST -------
Created an attachment (id=295780)
--> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=295780&action=view)
Sample RPM package for resolving this problem.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477410] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: liberation-fonts
AssignedTo: cchance(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: cchance(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or
several font files:
repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb'
-f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e
's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq
Unfortunately the script
does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can
close this bug report now.
Otherwise, you should know that:
- Fedora guidelines
demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_font...
- our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships
fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel
package.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Please make
your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide.
If your package is not
principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage
is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can
always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed
in the correct fontconfig directories.
It is preferred to make a font package or
subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines
requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a
font family is given on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family
The new
templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe.
The
following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: -
andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts -
dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts -
gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts -
gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts -
gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts
- gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts -
gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts -
gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
If you have any remaining
questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at
redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477420] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477420
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: lohit-fonts
AssignedTo: rbhalera(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: petersen(a)redhat.com, rbhalera(a)redhat.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or
several font files:
repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb'
-f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e
's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq
Unfortunately the script
does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can
close this bug report now.
Otherwise, you should know that:
- Fedora guidelines
demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_font...
- our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships
fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel
package.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Please make
your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide.
If your package is not
principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage
is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can
always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed
in the correct fontconfig directories.
It is preferred to make a font package or
subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines
requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a
font family is given on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family
The new
templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe.
The
following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: -
andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts -
dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts -
gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts -
gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts -
gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts
- gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts -
gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts -
gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
If you have any remaining
questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at
redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 472635] New: Google Droid fonts specification
by 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: Google Droid fonts specification
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472635
Summary: Google Droid fonts specification
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: distribution
AssignedTo: tcallawa(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: notting(a)redhat.com
CC: katzj(a)redhat.com, jkeating(a)redhat.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com
Blocks: 182235,446451
Classification: Fedora
Google has released for quite a long time a high-quality set of "Droid" fonts
as part of the Android platform. They have a high-visibility for average users
because of all the Google press barrage. The-Eula-protected Android SDK has
been superseded lately by a public source repository.
http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=platform/frameworks/base.git;a=tree;f=da...
The NOTICE file in this directory is a Fedora-friendly Apache License. However
the font metadata embedded in the files claims:
« This font software is the valuable property of Ascender Corporation and/or
its suppliers and its use by you is covered under the terms of a license
agreement. This font software is licensed to you by Ascender Corporation for
your personal or business use on up to five personal computers. You may not use
this font software on more than five personal computers unless you have
obtained a license from Ascender to do so. Except as specifically permitted by
the license, you may not copy this font software.
If you have any questions, please review the license agreement you received
with this font software, and/or contact Ascender Corporation.
Contact Information:
Ascender Corporation
Web http://www.ascendercorp.com/ »
But Ascender will redirect you to Google, which is as usual silent.
To check it,
1. download a raw TTF file
2. open it in Fontforge
3. -> Elements
4. -> Font Info
5. -> TTF Name
6. -> License (License URL is fun too)
This has so far discouraged Fedora and Debian packaging, even though wild Droid
packages have started to appear, people are incorporating Droid material in
derivatives, and one of those may eventually make it in the repo without
raising Legal bells.
Thus I have two questions:
1. is the legal situation clear enough to allow Fedora packaging as is
2. since Google won't step down to replying to solicitations by mere mortals,
can an official Fedora or Red Hat enquiry be made to clarify the situation?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477479] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: VLGothic-fonts
AssignedTo: ryo-dairiki(a)users.sourceforge.net
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: tagoh(a)redhat.com, ryo-dairiki(a)users.sourceforge.net,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or
several font files:
repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb'
-f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e
's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq
Unfortunately the script
does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can
close this bug report now.
Otherwise, you should know that:
- Fedora guidelines
demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_font...
- our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships
fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel
package.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Please make
your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide.
If your package is not
principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage
is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can
always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed
in the correct fontconfig directories.
It is preferred to make a font package or
subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines
requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a
font family is given on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family
The new
templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe.
The
following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: -
andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts -
dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts -
gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts -
gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts -
gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts
- gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts -
gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts -
gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
If you have any remaining
questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at
redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477451] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477451
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: samyak-fonts
AssignedTo: psatpute(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
psatpute(a)redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or
several font files:
repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb'
-f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e
's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq
Unfortunately the script
does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can
close this bug report now.
Otherwise, you should know that:
- Fedora guidelines
demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_font...
- our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships
fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel
package.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Please make
your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide.
If your package is not
principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage
is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can
always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed
in the correct fontconfig directories.
It is preferred to make a font package or
subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines
requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a
font family is given on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family
The new
templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe.
The
following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: -
andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts -
dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts -
gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts -
gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts -
gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts
- gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts -
gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts -
gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
If you have any remaining
questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at
redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477335] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477335
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: doulos-fonts
AssignedTo: roozbeh(a)gmail.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: roozbeh(a)gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com
Blocks: 477044
Classification: Fedora
After more than a month of consultation,
feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved
by FESCO.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new
templates.
The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can
serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package
are not clear enough:
❄ andika-fonts
❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts
❄ bitstream-vera-fonts
❄ charis-fonts
❄ dejavu-fonts
❄ ecolier-court-fonts
❄ edrip-fonts
❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts
❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts
❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts
❄ gfs-complutum-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-fonts
❄ gfs-eustace-fonts
❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts
❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts
❄ gfs-gazis-fonts
❄ gfs-jackson-fonts
❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts
❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts
❄ gfs-olga-fonts
❄ gfs-porson-fonts
❄ gfs-solomos-fonts
❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts
❄ stix-fonts
❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages,
nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so
you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines.
A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before
the F11 release.
Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on
fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477337] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477337
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: gentium-fonts
AssignedTo: roozbeh(a)gmail.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: roozbeh(a)gmail.com, kevin(a)tummy.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com
Blocks: 477044
Classification: Fedora
After more than a month of consultation,
feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved
by FESCO.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new
templates.
The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can
serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package
are not clear enough:
❄ andika-fonts
❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts
❄ bitstream-vera-fonts
❄ charis-fonts
❄ dejavu-fonts
❄ ecolier-court-fonts
❄ edrip-fonts
❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts
❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts
❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts
❄ gfs-complutum-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-fonts
❄ gfs-eustace-fonts
❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts
❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts
❄ gfs-gazis-fonts
❄ gfs-jackson-fonts
❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts
❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts
❄ gfs-olga-fonts
❄ gfs-porson-fonts
❄ gfs-solomos-fonts
❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts
❄ stix-fonts
❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages,
nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so
you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines.
A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before
the F11 release.
Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on
fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 477332] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by 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: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: baekmuk-ttf-fonts
AssignedTo: cchance(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: petersen(a)redhat.com, cchance(a)redhat.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Blocks: 477044
Classification: Fedora
After more than a month of consultation,
feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved
by FESCO.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_...
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts
Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new
templates.
The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can
serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package
are not clear enough:
❄ andika-fonts
❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts
❄ bitstream-vera-fonts
❄ charis-fonts
❄ dejavu-fonts
❄ ecolier-court-fonts
❄ edrip-fonts
❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts
❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts
❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts
❄ gfs-complutum-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts
❄ gfs-didot-fonts
❄ gfs-eustace-fonts
❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts
❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts
❄ gfs-gazis-fonts
❄ gfs-jackson-fonts
❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts
❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts
❄ gfs-olga-fonts
❄ gfs-porson-fonts
❄ gfs-solomos-fonts
❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts
❄ stix-fonts
❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts
FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages,
nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so
you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines.
A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before
the F11 release.
Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on
fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
15 years, 4 months
[Bug 429901] New: upon joined charecter the halant was not rendering properly in te-IN
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429901
Summary: upon joined charecter the halant was not rendering
properly in te-IN
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: i386
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: fonts-indic
AssignedTo: rbhalera(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: rbhalera(a)redhat.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: eng-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com,fedora-fonts-bugs-
list(a)redhat.com
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #400891 +++
Description of problem:
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Gedit 2.16.0
How reproducible:
maintain SCIM in RAWCODE.And provide the code se
Steps to Reproduce:
1.open Gedit 2.16.0
2.Maintain SCIM in RAWCODE.
3.And give the follwing code sequences 0c38+0c4d+0c1f+oc4d
Actual results:
స్ట్
Expected results:
will give in the attachement.
Additional info:
-- Additional comment from kkrothap(a)redhat.com on 2007-11-27 07:52 EST --
Created an attachment (id=269701)
--> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=269701&action=view)
html file.
-- Additional comment from kkrothap(a)redhat.com on 2007-11-27 07:59 EST --
Created an attachment (id=269711)
--> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=269711&action=view)
te-IN redering problem.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
15 years, 4 months