https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409011
Caolan McNamara <caolanm(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |CLOSED
Resolution|--- |NOTABUG
Last Closed| |2017-01-11 08:37:26
--- Comment #3 from Caolan McNamara <caolanm(a)redhat.com> ---
its possible on a single harfbuzz using app level to disable this with a custom
hb_unicode_funcs_set_decompose_func handler that returns false, but we want
everything to work the same, so presumably this decomposition is "a good thing"
in general and we won't override the upstream harfbuzz defaults
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409011
Caolan McNamara <caolanm(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproje
| |ct.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com,
| |psatpute(a)redhat.com
Component|libreoffice |harfbuzz
Assignee|caolanm(a)redhat.com |pnemade(a)redhat.com
Summary|wrong character displayed |wrong character displayed
|for zhi2; correct character |for zhi2; correct character
|not available in ibus. |not available in ibus
| |(harfbuzz decompose of
| |0x2F940 to 0x76F4)
--- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara <caolanm(a)redhat.com> ---
If I paste the text from firefox into LibreOffice then if I change the font to
fonts like "WenQuanYi Zen Hei", or "Source Han Sans CN" I get your expected
glyph
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2f940/index.htm states that
0x2F940 can be decomposed to "straight, erect, vertical (U+76F4)"
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/76f4/index.htm
If I change the font to e.g. VL Gothic then I get a glyph that looks like CJK
UNIFIED IDEOGRAPH-76F4
So if the font doesn't have 0x2F940 but it does have 0x76F4 then it will show
0x76F4. For LibreOffice at least, and presumably everything else, its harfbuzz
that does this substitution. (hb_unicode_funcs_set_decompose_func is relevent
here).
If the font doesn't have either 0x2F940 or 0x76F4 then fontconfig would be
asked for a replacement, in which case if anything has 0x2F940 then that will
be used.
So, everthing is apparently working by design on that front.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409247
--- Comment #6 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #5)
> (In reply to Akira TAGOH from comment #4)
> > fontconfig just requires one English font (at least, and no deps to the
> > specific fonts) to make it working. it was added to address it by the
> > request. I'm not sure if the langpacks sasisfies that though, if you have
> > any idea, please let me know.
> Imagine, you install fontconfig which pulls font X. Then you install fluxbox
> which pulls font Y. Both of them have Provides: font(:lang=en). When you
> remove fluxbox (and all unneeded packages) solver doesn't know which font is
> better to remove, X or Y. So it keeps both.
I could imagine why this happened. but there are no reaons to depend on the
specific fonts in fontconfig, then I said I'm not sure if or how the langpacks
sasisfies the fontconfig's requirements.
> Backto original bug: how come that it requires one English font? Is there
> some bug behind it or ...?
that's easy to imagine too... when no fonts installed on the system, fontconfig
will returns no fonts against the request from the applications. then
applications won't work as expected due to that.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409247
--- Comment #5 from Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Akira TAGOH from comment #4)
> fontconfig just requires one English font (at least, and no deps to the
> specific fonts) to make it working. it was added to address it by the
> request. I'm not sure if the langpacks sasisfies that though, if you have
> any idea, please let me know.
Imagine, you install fontconfig which pulls font X. Then you install fluxbox
which pulls font Y. Both of them have Provides: font(:lang=en). When you remove
fluxbox (and all unneeded packages) solver doesn't know which font is better to
remove, X or Y. So it keeps both.
Langpack system works with weak (and IIRC rich dependencies). You can check
implementation:
* https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/langpacks.git/tree/langpacks.spec
* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Langpacks
Making something similar could take a bit of time, but it will be definitely
better.
Backto original bug: how come that it requires one English font? Is there some
bug behind it or ...?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409247
--- Comment #4 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> ---
fontconfig just requires one English font (at least, and no deps to the
specific fonts) to make it working. it was added to address it by the request.
I'm not sure if the langpacks sasisfies that though, if you have any idea,
please let me know.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409247
Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj
| |ect.org,
| |i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproje
| |ct.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com,
| |tagoh(a)redhat.com
Component|dnf |fontconfig
Assignee|rpm-software-management@lis |tagoh(a)redhat.com
|ts.fedoraproject.org |
--- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko(a)redhat.com> ---
Requires: font(:lang=en)
in fontconfig.
fontconfig maintainer, if you really want to make proper lang-dependent
packages, look how langpacks are done. You can ping me anytime in question
regarding this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410397
Bug ID: 1410397
Summary: harfbuzz-1.4.0 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: harfbuzz
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee: pnemade(a)redhat.com
Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com,
psatpute(a)redhat.com
Latest upstream release: 1.4.0
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.3.4-1.fc26
URL: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/HarfBuzz
Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring
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/1299/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409792
Bug ID: 1409792
Summary: iso-codes-3.73 is available
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: iso-codes
Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
Assignee: caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com
Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com,
i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com
Latest upstream release: 3.73
Current version/release in rawhide: 3.72-2.fc26
URL: http://pkg-isocodes.alioth.debian.org/
Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy
More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring
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/1406/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401327
Bug ID: 1401327
Summary: Finnish (DAS) keyboard layout disappears from base.xml
in lastest update
Product: Fedora
Version: 25
Component: xkeyboard-config
Severity: urgent
Assignee: peter.hutterer(a)redhat.com
Reporter: iiro.laiho(a)iki.fi
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org,
negativo17(a)gmail.com, peter.hutterer(a)redhat.com
Description of problem:
The Finnish (DAS) keyboard layout disappears after lastest updates on Fedora
25.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
2.19-1.fc25
How reproducible:
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install F25, selecting Finnish (DAS) keyboard layout
2. Run dnf update
3. Reboot
Actual results:
It reverts to the ordinary Finnish QWERTY layout
Expected results:
The layout should stay the same
Additional info:
Reproducible on two systems: on a Dell Latitude 6320 and a QEMU/KVM virtual
machine.
Reverting this package to version 2.18-1 fixes the problem.
It is possibly related to this:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92169
They moved the DAS layout in upstream from base.xml to the base.xml.extras file
as it is less often used. It is however a very bad idea to do breaking changes
to a released distro in such a crucial thing as a keyboard layout.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409403
Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta(a)iki.fi> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |caillon+fedoraproject@gmail
| |.com,
| |i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproje
| |ct.org, pnemade(a)redhat.com
Component|rpmlint |iso-codes
Assignee|tcallawa(a)redhat.com |caillon+fedoraproject@gmail
| |.com
--- Comment #1 from Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta(a)iki.fi> ---
rpmlint's list of valid locale names is generated from the files shipped by
(upstream) iso-codes, so problems with the data in it should be reported and
fixed there.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.