i18n-bugs February 2015

i18n-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
348 discussions

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187337] Review Request: sil-coval-fonts - font derived from sans-serif
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187337 Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |panemade(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> --- Some suggestions: 1) Drop the sil prefix. This font does not look to be published on http://scripts.sil.org website so "sil" as a foundry cannot be used. 2) As fonts do get updates without getting their metadata updated. I suggest always to use maximum for versioning like if font provides version number then use it. Also, use the date on which you downloaded source. So consider this as a post-release snapshot package as given in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages If you look at http://openfontlibrary.org/en/font/bretan page, you can clearly see last updated date given as well as history also shows same zip archive name is used in past. So, your release tag can be either Release: 1.20150122%{?dist} or today's date as you downloaded source today Release: 1.20150203%{?dist} But, considering all these facts I will say for now use "1.20150122" as updated date is specified on website. If it was not there we should use current date. 3) fontconfig file should say "sans-serif" and not "serif" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qMYvYRe8Aq&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187528] [gnome-terminal] blurred rendering of PCF fonts after update of fontconfig
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187528 --- Comment #8 from Joachim Frieben <jfrieben(a)hotmail.com> --- Created attachment 987500 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=987500&action=edit Output of 'fc-match -a "Fixed:style=Regular:lang=en"' (In reply to Akira TAGOH from comment #7) I have copied /usr/share/X11/fonts/misc/cl* into $HOME/.fonts/ in order to make these fonts available to fontconfig. This set of bitmap fonts can be chosen through the font selector of gnome-terminal. The output of fc-match -a "Fixed:style=Regular:lang=en" can be found in the attachment. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cqh4CNmlJ9&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187528] [gnome-terminal] blurred rendering of PCF fonts after update of fontconfig
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187528 --- Comment #7 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- That config enforces the scalable font to choose which means you aren't using the attached font actually. you can see: $ fc-query /path/to/9x15-ISO8859-1.pcf | grep scalable scalable: False(s) Do you have any other "Fixed Regular" font in your box? what about fc-match -a "Fixed:style=Regular:lang=en" ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zcX9lQIJy4&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187528] [gnome-terminal] blurred rendering of PCF fonts after update of fontconfig
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187528 --- Comment #6 from Joachim Frieben <jfrieben(a)hotmail.com> --- (In reply to Akira TAGOH from comment #5) Enabling 70-yes-bitmaps.conf by setting <patelt name="scalable"><bool>true</bool></patelt> does not make any difference. I do not understand your reasoning on the handling of fonts: the chosen bitmap font is being used but the rendering is incorrect. There is no issue of erroneously giving preference of another font over the desired one. The reported issue appears to be related of a wrong scaling of the chosen bitmap font. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7SdxiFlvKE&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187528] [gnome-terminal] blurred rendering of PCF fonts after update of fontconfig
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187528 --- Comment #5 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- If it looks good on gnome-font-viewer, the font actually used for rendering on apps where you are seeing a problem may be different to what you expected because gnome-font-viewer disables the fallback on selecting a better font in pango. What exactly a font used in pango is hard to see at this moment. just checking the result of fc-match isn't necessarily correct to report the details. The difference between f22's and f21's related to this I think is, there are the change in scoring a font for bitmap and outline which prefer an outline font rather than bitmap until then, which was a bug. though the behavior looks opposed to that. I'm not sure if it makes any difference, how about enabling 70-yes-bitmaps.conf? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vHwyuHxPMB&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1186964] Review Request: libunicode - A library implementing algorithms related to the Unicode Standard
by Red Hat Bugzilla 03 Feb '15

03 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1186964 Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(tagoh(a)redhat.com) | --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH <tagoh(a)redhat.com> --- No guidelines for libraries AFAIK. General naming rule should be simply applied. I just pointed out the above confusion anyway. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7TubQbFQRA&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1024198] New: No way to change the desktop language in MATE Live
by Red Hat Bugzilla 02 Feb '15

02 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1024198 Bug ID: 1024198 Summary: No way to change the desktop language in MATE Live Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: LiveCD Keywords: i18n Assignee: mclasen(a)redhat.com Reporter: tagoh(a)redhat.com CC: i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Description of problem: MATE spin doesn't contain system-config-language nor the ability to change the language at the display manager unless I'm missing something there. so the user can't change the language on MATE Live. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Fedora-Live-MATE-Compiz-x86_64-20-Beta-TC6.iso How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1.boot iso 2. 3. Actual results: No system-config-language nor language selector at the display manager Expected results: should support any way to change the language Additional info: Apparently no a kind of "LiveCD - MATE" component in bugzilla. so just filed this here. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7ZZznpufQh&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 1

[Fedora-i18n-bugs] [Bug 1187337] Review Request: sil-coval-fonts - font derived from sans-serif
by Red Hat Bugzilla 01 Feb '15

01 Feb '15

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187337 --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade(a)gmail.com> --- Quick comment: Font packages need some time to get reviewed for things which fedora-review tool not provide as checklist. I will review this in next 2 days. Meantime do some package reviews. I think easiest way to use fedora-review tool is to get that package from latest comment where package links exists from bugzilla using fedora-review -b 1187337 --mock-config fedora-rawhide-x86_64 You may want to fill all the markings to each checklist item for every review you post to other packages also. See the Legend at top of review text. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KSWPrl8sWl&a=cc_unsubscribe

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

i18n-bugs February 2015