February 2022 - fonts-bugs - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Bug 1909251] New: stix-fonts-2.10 is available

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909251 Bug ID: 1909251 Summary: stix-fonts-2.10 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: stix-fonts Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 2.10 Current version/release in rawhide: 2.0.2-8.fc34 URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/stixfonts Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/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/4893/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 years, 1 month

1
18
0 / 0

[Bug 2045012] New: Split the Cantarell fonts into 2 for VF and non-variable fonts

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045012 Bug ID: 2045012 Summary: Split the Cantarell fonts into 2 for VF and non-variable fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: abattis-cantarell-fonts Assignee: klember(a)redhat.com Reporter: petersen(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: cosimo.cecchi(a)gmail.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, klember(a)redhat.com, me(a)fale.io, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Matthias Clasen pointed out that abattis-cantarell-fonts currently includes both variable and non-variable fonts. This duplication makes it harder for pango to choose the right font for example. We should split the binary package into two and only install the VF one by default. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): abattis-cantarell-fonts-0.301-6 Steps to Reproduce: 1. rpm -ql abattis-cantarell-fonts Actual results: Contains both fixed and variable fonts Expected results: Probably Cantarell-VF.otf should be moved to abattis-cantarell-vf-fonts subpackage and made the default. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045012

2 years, 1 month

1
8
0 / 0

[Bug 1809989] New: By default install Noto fonts for Unicode scripts not already covered by default

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809989 Bug ID: 1809989 Summary: By default install Noto fonts for Unicode scripts not already covered by default Product: Fedora Version: 31 Status: NEW Component: google-noto-fonts Assignee: petersen(a)redhat.com Reporter: hsivonen(a)hsivonen.fi QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora There is currently movement towards protecting browser users from font fingerprinting. This means refusing, by default, to load user-installed fonts, which makes the set of fonts that each OS installs by default even more important than before. Firefox bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1582687 W3C CSS WG issue: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4497 Currently, Windows 10, macOS, Android, and Chrome OS provide broader installed-by-default Unicode coverage than Fedora. Examples of living scripts that have enough active users to make it to the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_writing_systems#List_of_writing_scr... but are not supported by default in Fedora 31 include Javanese, Sundanese, Batak, Balinese, Mongolian, and New Tai Lue. Egyptian hieroglyphs is an example of a dead script the Fedora 31 doesn't support out of the box but Windows 10, macOS, Chrome OS, and Android do. To remedy this with minimal disk space impact, I suggest the same approach that Apple took. Apple bundles with macOS those Noto fonts that cover scripts that were not already covered by the previous installed-by-default set of fonts on macOS. In the macOS case, the on-disk footprint of the Noto fonts that were required to take macOS to Android/Chrome OS-competitive Unicode coverage was only a couple of megabytes. (The fonts are hidden in /Library/Application Support/Apple/Fonts/Language Support/.) In the case of Fedora, the set of Noto fonts required to reach the Chrome OS / Android level of script coverage is a bit larger than in the macOS case but should still be manageable. Please install, by default, those Noto fonts that provide support for scripts that are not properly supported by the fonts that Fedora already installs by default. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 years, 1 month

1
12
0 / 0

[Bug 2055204] New: sil-charis-fonts-6.101 is available

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055204 Bug ID: 2055204 Summary: sil-charis-fonts-6.101 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: sil-charis-fonts Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, pnemade(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Latest upstream release: 6.101 Current version/release in rawhide: 6.001-1.fc36 URL: http://scripts.sil.org/CharisSIL_download Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/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/4818/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2055204

2 years, 1 month

1
6
0 / 0

[Bug 1784650] New: Fontconfig is slow, causing stuttering and freezing

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1784650 Bug ID: 1784650 Summary: Fontconfig is slow, causing stuttering and freezing Product: Fedora Version: 31 Status: NEW Component: fontconfig Severity: high Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: bepvte+bugzilla(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: ajax(a)redhat.com, caillon+fedoraproject(a)gmail.com, fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, gnome-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, john.j5live(a)gmail.com, mclasen(a)redhat.com, pnemade(a)redhat.com, rhughes(a)redhat.com, rstrode(a)redhat.com, sandmann(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Fontconfig is much much slower than on other distros, and it stutters or freezes applications that use it. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Name : fontconfig Version : 2.13.92 Release : 3.fc31 Architecture: x86_64 How reproducible: I can reproduce this bug on a fresh Fedora 31 vm with the Xfce desktop and google-noto-sans-* fonts installed. Steps to Reproduce: 1. dnf install google-noto-sans-* 2. run gedit on the attached example file alternatively 1. dnf install google-noto-sans-* 2. open firefox and browse to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q52 (page with lots of languages) Actual results: It takes around 60 seconds for gedit to become responsive to scrolling and input. Mousepad is faster but still slow. It takes firefox upwards of 5 minutes to get to first paint on a page with many fonts or languages, compared to a simpler page. Expected results: Gedit should load files with many fonts at a similar speed as other distros. The page should load quickly, like on Debian and others. Additional info: I have tried to diagnose the source of this issue in many ways. Running `perf trace` on what sysprof indicated was the most busy function (FcStrCmpIgnoreCaseAndDelims), shows that every name of every font family is being compared to every other name of every other font family. I do not know if this is a normal behaviour of fontconfig. I have noticed the amount of calls to "FcStrCmpIgnoreCaseAndDelims" and program startup time both drop to a similar amount as Debian's when all of the "google-noto" configuration files in /etc/fonts/conf.d/ are deleted (These files are not present in Debian). However, this might not be the source of the problem: In the Debian vm, with a copy of my computer's /etc/fonts/, including the google-noto files, (I took care to ensure that there would be no broken symlinks) and /usr/share/fonts, fontconfig does not stall any programs. The amount of calls to FcStrCmpIgnoreCaseAndDelims is also much lower as well. This led me to believe that it was a difference caused by compiler flags but this does not seem to be the case. I tried to replace the optflags in the package, except for the rpmbuild required debug ones, and found no difference. I also checked to ensure that it was not caused by GCC version differences. Debian results for mousepad: 1,845,449 calls to FcStrCmpIgnoreCaseAndDelims Time: 5 seconds Fedora results for mousepad: 11,658,380 calls to FcStrCmpIgnoreCaseAndDelims Time: 23 seconds https://perfht.ml/2tleJxN Here is a link to a Firefox profiler result of the wikidata page, where in the flame graph you can see that Firefox is spending most of its time in fontconfig. You can also see "FirstNonBlankPaint" is at 50 seconds in the marker table. TLDR: Fontconfig matching is slow with all google-noto fonts installed, unless you remove the noto config files. Using the same exact font directory and config directory (including the noto config files) on Debian does not cause the same problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 years, 2 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 182038] MuktiNarrow font is missing in fonts-bengali package

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182038 Dr Anirban Mitra <mitra_anirban(a)yahoo.co.in> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org, | |mitra_anirban(a)yahoo.co.in --- Comment #7 from Dr Anirban Mitra <mitra_anirban(a)yahoo.co.in> --- As Mukti Narrow fonts are now part of fedora as fbf-mukti-fonts, as developer and maintainer of the font I thought it is important to clear the legal issues once and for all. 1. Free software foundation announced release of Indian language fonts by Akruti Multimedia https://web.archive.org/web/20021129221508/http://www.gnu.org.in/software... bng-1 and bng-2 among them 2. Mukti font family was created using bng-1 and Mukti Narrow family was created using bng-2 family 3. Mike Meir told in Microsoft volt forum that bng-1 glyphs are a lift off from Linotype Bengali. https://forum.fontlab.com/archive-old-microsoft-volt-group/perfect-bengal... 4. We at Free Bangla font project, informed FSF india regarding the claim. 5. In May 2003, Free Software foundation announced withdrawal of bng-1n and bng-1b from GPL https://web.archive.org/web/20030523225032/https://fsf.org.in/ 6. Immediately original Mukti Regular and Mukti Bold font is withdrawn. 7. In 2006, Mukti Narrow family, which was not encumbered by any copyright claim, was renamed Mukti. So present Mukti font has no legal issues. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182038

2 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2050295] Review Request: uniol-fonts - Unicode compliant Open source Ol Chiki or Ol Cemet font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050295 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> --- FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050295

2 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2050295] Review Request: uniol-fonts - Unicode compliant Open source Ol Chiki or Ol Cemet font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050295 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2022-02-25 16:51:14 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> --- FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050295

2 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2048456] Review Request: fbf-mukti-fonts - Bangla open source Opentype font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048456 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> --- FEDORA-2022-abd3307aea has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048456

2 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2048456] Review Request: fbf-mukti-fonts - Bangla open source Opentype font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048456 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2022-02-24 23:07:27 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> --- FEDORA-2022-e6f3e3c4ba has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048456

2 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs February 2022