Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Liberation Mono is not really monospaced font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557862
Summary: Liberation Mono is not really monospaced font Product: Fedora Version: 12 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: liberation-fonts AssignedTo: cchance@redhat.com ReportedBy: kir@sacred.ru QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: petersen@redhat.com, cchance@redhat.com, fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org, fedora-i18n-bugs@redhat.com Classification: Fedora
Description of problem: When using Liberation Mono as a default monospace font in Firefox, I have noticed that the lines of equal width (in terms of characters) all have different width. It can clearly be seen on a screenshots that I will attach shortly.
It took me about 15 minutes to understand it. I tried with Andale Mono and it looks fine.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): $ rpm -q liberation-mono-fonts liberation-fonts-common fontconfig freetype firefox fedora-release liberation-mono-fonts-1.05.1.20090721-2.fc12.noarch liberation-fonts-common-1.05.1.20090721-2.fc12.noarch fontconfig-2.8.0-1.fc12.x86_64 fontconfig-2.8.0-1.fc12.i686 freetype-2.3.11-3.fc12.x86_64 freetype-2.3.11-3.fc12.i686 firefox-3.5.6-1.fc12.x86_64 fedora-release-12-2.noarch
How reproducible: always
Steps to Reproduce: 1. make sure liberation mono is installed (rpm -q liberation-mono-fonts) and available (fc-match 'liberation mono') 2. Open this page in your browser http://kir.sacred.ru/tmp/liberation-mono.html 3. Try increasing/decreasing text size (in case of Firefox use Ctrl with +/-).
Actual results: Lines are of different width
Expected results: Lines are of the same width
Additional info:
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=557862
--- Comment #1 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:03:54 EST --- Created an attachment (id=386212) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=386212) lmbug1.png
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=557862
--- Comment #2 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:04:27 EST --- Created an attachment (id=386213) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=386213) lmbug2.png
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=557862
--- Comment #3 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:05:01 EST --- Created an attachment (id=386214) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=386214) lmbug3.png
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=557862
--- Comment #4 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:05:23 EST --- Created an attachment (id=386215) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=386215) lmbug4.png
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=557862
--- Comment #5 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:11:03 EST --- (1) I consider this is a major bug.
(2) A very interesting thing (if you look at screenshots) is we have different relative line widths on different font sizes: say on lmbug3.png line #3 is longest, while on lmbug1.png and lmbug2.png it is shortest!
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=557862
--- Comment #6 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:50:24 EST --- This is becoming even more interesting. On a colleague's system (Fedora 11) it looks fine, here's the versions of packages she have:
$ rpm -q liberation-mono-fonts liberation-fonts-common fontconfig freetype firefox fedora-release liberation-mono-fonts-1.04.93-10.fc11.noarch liberation-fonts-common-1.04.93-10.fc11.noarch fontconfig-2.8.0-1.fc11.x86_64 fontconfig-2.8.0-1.fc11.i586 freetype-2.3.9-5.fc11.i586 freetype-2.3.9-5.fc11.x86_64 firefox-3.5.6-1.fc11.x86_64 fedora-release-11-1.noarch
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=557862
--- Comment #7 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 13:53:45 EST --- Firefox is not guilty -- I have just reproduced the issue using Mousepad text editor from XFCE.
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=557862
--- Comment #8 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 14:04:19 EST --- Downgrading freetype to version from F11 (ie 2.3.9-5) not helped.
Rebuilding the font package from src (liberation-fonts-1.05.1.20090721-2.fc12.src.rpm) not helped
*Downgrading the font package (to a version from F11, ie 1.04.93-10.fc11) did helped!*
So the problem lies somewhere in between 1.0.4 and 1.0.5
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=557862
--- Comment #9 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 14:12:12 EST --- OK I guess it's dupe of #508899
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=557862
--- Comment #10 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-22 14:12:25 EST --- OK I guess it's dupe of bug #508899
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=557862
Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #11 from Kir Kolyshkin kir@sacred.ru 2010-01-25 03:43:47 EST ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 508899 ***
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=557862
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-10-13 00:49:07 EDT --- liberation-fonts-1.06.0.20100721-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/liberation-fonts-1.06.0.20100721-3.f...
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=557862
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-10-18 01:41:15 EDT --- liberation-fonts-1.06.0.20100721-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
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=557862
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |liberation-fonts-1.06.0.201 | |00721-3.fc14 Resolution|DUPLICATE |ERRATA
fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org