On 4/11/07, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net> wrote:
Le Mer 11 avril 2007 03:54, Jens Petersen a écrit :
> Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> Nope. Their whole point is not to add a fontconfig dep to font packages
> Should bugs be filed against all fonts packages that currently require
IMHO yes. When this was formalized (around Bitstream Vera inclusion in
fedora.us then FC) non adherence of font packages to any specific renderer
was an explicit objective. (I'm speaking of truetype/opentype packages
there, core fonts are a lost cause).
The most one can do is conflict with old fontconfig packages if the rpm
dumps a conf file in /etc/fonts, since fontconfig syntax has evolved over
Can you please provide more information on this issue of not having
"Requires: fontconfig" in fonts packages?
Currently I am in confusion on whether to drop fontconfig as
Requires or not and still packaging guidelines is missing this issue
to address it.
I am sure many new packages got added to Fedora recently and many
will be coming in future. But still we are missing proper fonts
guidelines page. I think its good if we have wiki page that will
describe and give sample SPEC for fonts packages including how to
handle license and its naming issues for new coming fonts package