Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578015
--- Comment #5 from Akira TAGOH tagoh@redhat.com 2010-04-01 03:53:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
Ok, if it doesn t really work, I ll change it when I m back from vacation next week
Thanks. to make this clearer more, as a result, this change will puts more gravity to the priority prefix to determine which fonts is better, because strong binding only overrides this list after that and we use that for the case only where AA font could replaces BB font say. and it works expectedly as long as we test the language properly.
Do you want commit acces to fontpackages so you can contribute enhancements directly in the future ? I hate being the single point of failure there
That would be really nice :) I continued the development of the fontconfig audit stuff recently and nearly ready to see if config files contains authorized rules against templates. I'm keen to contribute this audit program, but anyway.