March 2024 - fonts-bugs - Fedora Mailing-Lists

[Bug 2051879] Review Request: fbf-ani-fonts - Script like Bengali Font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051879 Dr Anirban Mitra <mitra_anirban(a)yahoo.co.in> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(mitra_anirban@yah |needinfo- |oo.co.in) | --- Comment #14 from Dr Anirban Mitra <mitra_anirban(a)yahoo.co.in> --- I am still interested in review of this package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051879 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

4 weeks

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2051879] Review Request: fbf-ani-fonts - Script like Bengali Font

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051879 Package Review <package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(mitra_anirban@yah | |oo.co.in) --- Comment #13 from Package Review <package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> --- This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2051879 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

4 weeks, 1 day

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1954359] Many emoji don't show up in Qt apps because qt does not handle 'emoji' font family

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whiteboard|AcceptedFreezeException |https://discussion.fedorapr |https://discussion.fedorapr |oject.org/t/81017 |oject.org/t/81017 | Blocks|2083911 | |(F38BetaFreezeException) | --- Comment #25 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> --- Dropping useless F38 FE tags. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2083911 [Bug 2083911] Fedora 38 Beta freeze exception bug tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

4 weeks, 1 day

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1954359] Many emoji don't show up in Qt apps because qt does not handle 'emoji' font family

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|qt5-qtbase |qt6-qtbase QA Contact|extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org | --- Comment #24 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> --- Yes. Since Qt5 is dead-ish now and KDE is on Qt6, we might as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

4 weeks, 1 day

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1954359] Many emoji don't show up in Qt apps because qt does not handle 'emoji' font family

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 --- Comment #23 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- This can probably moved to qt6, right? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1954359 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2264603] kde-settings-plasma depends on google-noto-sans-fonts instead of google-noto-sans-vf-fonts

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264603 Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC| |fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproj | |ect.org, | |petersen(a)redhat.com, | |tagoh(a)redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen <petersen(a)redhat.com> --- +1 I came here to report the same thing -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264603 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2240646] google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts is not compatible with Steam

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240646 --- Comment #5 from Peng Wu <pwu(a)redhat.com> --- Please open another bug for the XeTeX issue, thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240646 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2240646] google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts is not compatible with Steam

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240646 akiyks(a)gmail.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |akiyks(a)gmail.com --- Comment #4 from akiyks(a)gmail.com --- I encountered similar breakage in XeTeX engine. Minimal latex source which uses "Noto Sans CJK SC" through the xeCJK package: test.tex: ------------------------------------------- \documentclass{article} \usepackage{xeCJK} \setCJKmainfont{Noto Sans CJK SC} \setCJKmonofont{Noto Sans Mono CJK SC} \begin{document} 中文 \LaTeX 示例。 {\ttfamily 中文 \LaTeX 示例。 } \end{document} ------------------------------------------- With only google-noto-sans-cjk-fonts and google-noto-sans-mono-cjk-fonts installed, "xelatex test.tex" works fine. Thanks to the removal of conflicts, I can install google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts and google-noto-sans-mono-cjk-vf-fonts alongside the non-variable fonts. "xelatex test.tex" now gives this: ------------------------------------------- This is XeTeX, Version 3.141592653-2.6-0.999995 (TeX Live 2023) (preloaded format=xelatex) restricted \write18 enabled. entering extended mode (./main.tex LaTeX2e <2022-11-01> patch level 1 L3 programming layer <2023-02-22> (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/article.cls Document Class: article 2022/07/02 v1.4n Standard LaTeX document class (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/size10.clo)) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/xelatex/xecjk/xeCJK.sty (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/l3kernel/expl3.sty (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/l3backend/l3backend-xetex.def)) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/ctex/ctexhook.sty) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/l3packages/xtemplate/xtemplate.sty) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/fontspec/fontspec.sty (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/l3packages/xparse/xparse.sty) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/fontspec/fontspec-xetex.sty (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/fontenc.sty) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/fontspec/fontspec.cfg))) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/xelatex/xecjk/xeCJK.cfg)) (./main.aux) (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/tex/latex/base/ts1cmr.fd) [1] (./main.aux) xdvipdfmx:fatal: Invalid TTC index number No output PDF file written. ) Error 256 (driver return code) generating output; file main.pdf may not be valid. Transcript written on main.log. ------------------------------------------- In main.log, there are info level messages of interest: ------------------------------------------- Package fontspec Info: Could not resolve font "Noto Sans CJK SC/BI" (it (fontspec) probably doesn't exist). Package fontspec Info: Could not resolve font "Noto Sans CJK SC/B" (it (fontspec) probably doesn't exist). Package fontspec Info: Could not resolve font "Noto Sans CJK SC/I" (it (fontspec) probably doesn't exist). ----------------------------- I'm suspecting that XeTeX engine doesn't expect the mere presence of -VF fonts of the same name and generates bogus main.xdv which causes the error of xdvipdfmx. My question is: Can I hide the -VF fonts from XeTeX by tweaking fontconfig's per-user setting without removing those -vf packages system wide? Longer term, I guess it would be ideal to teach XeTeX to ignore -VF fonts. I have no idea if such an update is possible, though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240646 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2266182] New: CVE-2024-25081 CVE-2024-25082 fontforge: various flaws [fedora-all]

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266182 Bug ID: 2266182 Summary: CVE-2024-25081 CVE-2024-25082 fontforge: various flaws [fedora-all] Product: Fedora Version: 39 Status: NEW Component: fontforge Keywords: Security, SecurityTracking Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: kevin(a)scrye.com Reporter: zmiele(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, kevin(a)scrye.com, pnemade(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora More information about these security flaws is available in the following bugs: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266180 http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266181 Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266182 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month

1
8
0 / 0

[Bug 2262410] New: Fonts are looking wrong after 20240101 update

by bugzilla＠redhat.com

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410 Bug ID: 2262410 Summary: Fonts are looking wrong after 20240101 update Product: Fedora Version: 39 Hardware: x86_64 OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: google-noto-fonts Severity: medium Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: priv.luk(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, pwu(a)redhat.com, tagoh(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Fonts look improperly in multiple places, e.g. mpv or KDE file picker. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open mpv and look at OSD fonts Actual Results: Fonts look wrong Expected Results: Fonts look properly See https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/issues/13396 for screenshots. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262410 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-...

1 month, 1 week

1
35
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs March 2024