https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1496466

David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] dkaspar@redhat.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?

--- Comment #8 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] dkaspar@redhat.com --- (In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #3)

Reading http://www.gust.org.pl/projects/e-foundry/tex-gyre/index_html#Licensing

they got URW to publish the fonts under their own pet license to avoid dealing with Ghostscript licensing they didn't understood. So as long as they rebased to that release with no ghostscript import they are ok legal-wise (do check with spot if you feel like it, though I'm pretty sure he'd have blocked them from TexLive during its TEX audits if there was still a problem).

That sucks if GS added fixes over URW material, but that's how free software works when projects disagree on licensing.

Actually, that note mentions Ghostscript 4.0, which is really old. We currently have 9.X for a quite long time in Fedora now. That might be worth poking in it, to see what the current status is... :)

(In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #1)

Someone should really package tex gyre in Fedora, now that the legal issues have been solved (IIRC). That's basically the same fonts in an opentype container.

Sorry, I'm not going through that rabbit hole again... :D The reason I went into updating urw-base35-fonts was that those are needed by ghostscript, and I want to finally fix all the issues related to f***ed building process. However, if you want, feel free to take inspiration from urw-base35-fonts specfile: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/urw-base35-fonts/blob/master/f/urw-base35...

It should be more or less OK (I'm trying to keep it up-to-date), and should be well commented.

(In reply to Nicolas Mailhot from comment #3)

It does not matter if they are packaged as texlive subpackages or as independent projects as long as the template is applied. Also, whoever packages them needs to ship some fontconfig files that aliases the various past names of the fonts to the new one for backwards compat. Again there are templates to do so in fontpackages-devel.

That's another issue. Ideally, the good fonts should not only have the fontconfig files properly created for them, but AppStream files as well. I had to create/copy & modify those files manually for urw-base35-fonts, and it took quite some effort to convince usptream to include them in their releases.

The AppStream for font files allow users to see the preview of them in Gnome Software (and other software centers in other distros that are using AppStream).