Hi, I asked about the Fira fonts on the fedora-devel and they
suggested me to forward the email to the Fonts SIG mailing list.
Please read the following message:
---------- Forwarded message ---------
De: Mateus Rodrigues Costa <mateusrodcosta(a)gmail.com>
Date: qui., 12 de set. de 2024 às 15:37
Subject: Post-Mozilla Fira font family
To: <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Hello all,
So, as you guys might know Mozilla commissioned the development of the
Fira fonts with the goal of using it for FirefoxOS (which is mostly
dead nowadays unless you consider KaiOS). [1]
However Mozilla abandoned development of Fira Sans on version 4.2,
whereas bBox Type GmbH developed Fira Sans further up until version
4.3 and ended up also extending Fira Sans with more language support
by request of a different company, which got released as a new font:
Fira GO. [2]
I opened a bug report a while back asking for changing the upstream of
the current Fira fonts from the mozilla upstream to the bBox Type one,
although I haven't received any reply yet. [3]
Do note that this would affect the already packaged Fira Sans and Fira
Mono fonts by upgrading to slightly newer versions from a new
upstream, the Fira GO font would be a new package available on the
repos and the Fira Code and Fira Math (not sure if this one is
packaged) are unrelated to this change as they are completely separate
fonts forked from the main Fira ones with their own upstreams.
What can be done here?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fira_(typeface)
[2] https://bboxtype.com/downloads/Projects/FiraGO_FiraSans_180109.pdf
[3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2308744
Thanks for your time,
Mateus Rodrigues Costa
Hello team,
I am looking for a packager to review the package rsms-inter-fonts used
as default by Blender 3D software.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2253619
The spec is straightforward as it uses the fonts template.
Thanks in advance
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
Hi Luya,
On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 6:51 AM Luya Tshimbalanga <luya(a)coolest-storm.net>
wrote:
> Hello team,
>
> I have an issue building Inter fonts using font spec template.
>
> https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@designsuite/fonts/fedor…
>
> Can someone investigate please? The spec file is attached for preview.
>
Use this in %prep
----------------------------
-%autosetup -n inter-%{version}
+%autosetup -c inter-%{version}
-----------------------------
Then you should be able to build this font package.
Regards,
Parag
>
Hello team,
I have an issue building Inter fonts using font spec template.
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@designsuite/fonts/fedor…
Can someone investigate please? The spec file is attached for preview.
Thanks in advance.
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
Hello team,
It appears an issue occurred with Comfortaa fonts when using "8". Can
someone investigate the root cause of the problem?
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2248572 for details.
Thanks in advance.
--
Luya Tshimbalanga
Fedora Design Team
Fedora Design Suite maintainer
Hi, we have been thinking about the default fonts for Indic (Indian)
scripts in Fedora.
For many languages in Fedora we are already using Google's open-source Noto
fonts (for most Western languages and also Arabic and CJK (Chinese,
Japanese and Korean) and more, not least Emoji too. Also already for
Gurmukhi (Punjabi) and Sinhala.
$ rpm -qa google-noto-*-fonts | wc -l
26
Noto fonts have the advantage that they are available in different faces
("Sans" and "Serif") and multiple weights (also as Variable Fonts (VF),
which can save a lot of space). They also seem to be generally actively
maintained.
So we would like feedback on how Indian Fedora users feel about using the
Indic Noto fonts compared to Lohit fonts (which we haven't been able to
maintain actively for some time now), given the above advantages.
Sudip Shil has prepared some comparison screenshots using his fonts-compare
tool of Lohit vs Noto: see
https://sshil.fedorapeople.org/lohit-vs-noto-comparison.html
To easily test Noto yourself, Sudip Shil has also prepared a Copr repo
which contains the Lohit fonts rebuilt with lower priority:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sshil/indic-fonts-test which needs
to be enabled:
$ sudo dnf copr enable sshil/indic-fonts-test
Furthermore it is necessary to install the corresponding Noto VF fonts
$ sudo dnf install google-noto-sans-devanagari-vf-fonts
google-noto-sans-bengali-vf-fonts google-noto-sans-gujarati-vf-fonts
google-noto-sans-kannada-vf-fonts google-noto-sans-oriya-vf-fonts
google-noto-sans-tamil-vf-fonts google-noto-sans-telugu-vf-fonts
Then run:
$ sudo dnf update lohit-*-fonts
*Note*: if you are on Fedora Rawhide you currently have to "dnf remove
lohit-*-fonts" instead, since the Indic Noto fonts there have lower
priority currently.
And now you should see Noto as the default for most Indic scripts:
$ for lang in as bho bn brx doi gu hi hne kn kok mai ml mni mr or pa sa sat
ta te; do echo -en "$lang\t" ; fc-match :lang=$lang family; done
You may prefer to try this first in a test VM, or to shut down your
important applications using Indic text first before changing the fonts on
your system.
The instructions on Sudip's Copr repo also include the steps for undoing
these changes.
Do let us know what you think of the Noto fonts compared to Lohit for Indic
scripts.
If they look good we can consider switching those scripts to default to
Noto.
Jens
--
Fedora & Red Hat i18n team
Currently FedoraReview has problems when using fonts. Made a pull
request to resolve that ttname is no longer available and use fc-query:
https://www.pagure.io/FedoraReview/pull-request/457
A review would be helpful.
Hi Fonts SIG,
Currently there is poor discoverability of what fonts provide a glyph for a particular a code point.
It was recently asked [1] what font package in Fedora is needed to display U+130DF [2].
## Method 1: Download all font packages and use fc-list
One way to determine this would be to install every font package and then issue the following `fc-list` invocation: `fc-list :charset=130DF`:
```sh
sudo dnf repoquery --available --whatprovides 'font(*)' | xargs sudo dnf install -y
fc-list :charset=130DF
```
Aside: Is there a better way to list all font packages than this:
sudo dnf repoquery --whatprovides 'font(*)'
## Method 2: Pipe Dream: Declare code points as PROVIDES in the RPM spec
It would be cool if there was somehow a way to declare in the RPM spec of the font RPM what code points this font has glyphs for. Then something like `sudo dnf whatprovdes glyph(130DF)` could be used to discover the fonts that have a glyph for U+130DF.
Probably not feasible, but throwing it out there.
## Method 3: A Fedora website: Fedora Font Showcase
A website could be designed that showcases the fonts Fedora has packaged.
It could include a **search by code point** feature.
A database containing the relationship between font packages and code points could be created using the technique of Method 1.
## Other ideas?
[1]: https://ask.fedoraproject.org/t/which-font-is-needed-to-display-correctly/2…
[2]: https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+130DF