[Bug 477449] 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=477449
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: roadstencil-fonts
AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(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.
13 years, 9 months
[Bug 477459] 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=477459
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: sportrop-fonts
AssignedTo: jonstanley(a)gmail.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: jonstanley(a)gmail.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(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.
13 years, 9 months
[Bug 490830] New: Nafees Web Naksha should drop Preferred Family name
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: Nafees Web Naksha should drop Preferred Family name
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490830
Summary: Nafees Web Naksha should drop Preferred Family name
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: nafees-web-naskh-fonts
AssignedTo: mathieu.bridon(a)gmail.com
ReportedBy: pnemade(a)redhat.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: johnp(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
mathieu.bridon(a)gmail.com
Classification: Fedora
Target Release: ---
Description of problem:
Nafees Web Naksha when installed shows only Nafees as font name in font
selection box. When other Nafees fonts installed manually all will point to
same name Nafees in font selection dialog box.This should not happen and should
show all font names from Nafees font family
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
nafees-web-naskh-fonts-1.0-5.fc11.noarch
How reproducible:
always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. install this font
2. open this font in fontforge
3. check TTFNames in FontInfo(Ctrl+Shift+F)
4. Look for Preferred Family and Family fields.
Actual results:
currently it shows font name as Nafees
Expected results:
Should show font name as Nafees Web Naksha
Additional info:
Thanks to Muhammad Saad who reported this on fedora-i18n channel.
--
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.
13 years, 10 months
[Bug 478332] New: Nimbus Mono L Bold Oblique is not really monospace
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: Nimbus Mono L Bold Oblique is not really monospace
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478332
Summary: Nimbus Mono L Bold Oblique is not really monospace
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: urw-fonts
AssignedTo: than(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: besfahbo(a)redhat.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: than(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Apparently glyph 227 (or maybe 226 according to fontforge) of
/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1/n022024l.pfb has a width of 740 while all the
other glyphs in the font have width 600. This causes fontconfig to mark the
font as proportional instead of monospace. That then is causing other issues:
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17493
--
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.
13 years, 10 months
[Bug 474514] New: file conflict on upgrading
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: file conflict on upgrading
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474514
Summary: file conflict on upgrading
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: dejavu-fonts
AssignedTo: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
ReportedBy: tagoh(a)redhat.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
Description of problem:
Transaction Check Error:
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono-Bold.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-mono-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono-BoldOblique.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-mono-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono-Oblique.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-mono-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-mono-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerif-Bold.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerif.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerif-BoldItalic.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerif-Italic.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerifCondensed-Bold.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerifCondensed-BoldItalic.ttf from install
of dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerifCondensed-Italic.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSerifCondensed.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-serif-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Bold.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-BoldOblique.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Oblique.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-ExtraLight.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-Bold.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-BoldOblique.ttf from install
of dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-Oblique.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
file /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed.ttf from install of
dejavu-fonts-sans-2.26-6.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
# rpm -qa | grep dejavu
dejavu-fonts-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
dejavu-fonts-experimental-2.26-2.fc10.noarch
--
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.
13 years, 10 months
[Bug 477486] 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=477486
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: xorg-x11-fonts
AssignedTo: xgl-maint(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: xgl-maint(a)redhat.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(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.
13 years, 11 months
[Bug 491976] New: [fonts-ISO8859-2] Please rebuild for Fedora 11 to pick up font autodeps
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: [fonts-ISO8859-2] Please rebuild for Fedora 11 to pick up font autodeps
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491976
Summary: [fonts-ISO8859-2] Please rebuild for Fedora 11 to pick
up font autodeps
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: fonts-ISO8859-2
AssignedTo: rbhalera(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: rbhalera(a)redhat.com,
fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com,
fedora-i18n-bugs(a)redhat.com
Classification: Fedora
.
--
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.
13 years, 11 months
[Bug 477429] 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=477429
Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Component: myanmar3-unicode-fonts
AssignedTo: mvaliyav(a)redhat.com
ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: mvaliyav(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(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.
13 years, 11 months