From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 1 05:29:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 00:29:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478570] Review Request: RiordonFancy-fonts - A stylized font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901010529.n015TuSw030411@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478570 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 1 19:20:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 14:20:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477055] Please drop fonts spec template from rpmdevtools In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901011920.n01JKcib008197@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477055 --- Comment #12 from Ville Skytt? 2009-01-01 14:20:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > Is it possible for rpmdevtools to support replacing of the macro syntax too? I suppose it's _possible_, but I'm not at all sure about the feasibility. The shell style ones can obviously be used only in specfile constructs that are shell code, and replacing macro style ones with them in other sections would cause breakage, and implementing a real specfile parser is not something I even want to think about. For spec templates that are shipped in rpmdevtools I can ensure that no breakage occurs but I can't do that for templates in other packages, such as these new font templates. > Because I know many packagers use the templates as plain text templates too > without use of rpmdevtools automation, and I'd really like the default not to > be the shell variant in that case > > I also have some opinions on this point :p Doh :P. Well, even if it's not a "solution", I suppose educating them to take advantage of the rpmdevtools features wouldn't hurt. > Of course it it's absolutely necessary for rpmdevtools I will change this. It's not "absolutely necessary", but unless changed, it will be a small regression. rpmdevtools 7.0 does not do macros->shell replacement, but it should take care of the -simple/-multi selection, always producing a foo-fonts.spec result, and replacement. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 13:03:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:03:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021303.n02D33qg014277@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-02 08:03:02 EDT --- php-ZendFramework-1.7.2-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-ZendFramework-1.7.2-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 13:12:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:12:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021312.n02DCpWp016470@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #5 from Alexander Kahl 2009-01-02 08:12:50 EDT --- Updates for F-9 and F-10 submitted for testing. Package cannot be built for rawhide right now because of missing F-11 bitstream-vera-fonts, so it seems.. clueless. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 14:40:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:40:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021440.n02EeqDw015057@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-02 09:40:51 EDT --- The font packages in rawhide have been reorganised https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-fonts-list/2008-December/msg00025.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 14:45:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:45:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021445.n02EjfQX015954@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-02 09:45:40 EDT --- Given the number of problem packages I'll try to get a nagbot sending warnings about misplaces fonts so it'll be more hassle for you not to convert (I think) And 503k is already as big as many of our small packages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 14:43:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:43:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477482] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021443.n02EhJUX001373@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477482 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-02 09:43:18 EDT --- It is a good idea to remind upstream they should use fontconfig like everyone else so you don't need to maintain brittle symlinks Nevertheless, this is a separate mid-term bug, as opposed to the short-term symlinking solution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 14:56:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:56:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021456.n02EuAEe003866@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-02 09:56:10 EDT --- So one subpackage for the /lib/default.ttf, or one each for the ones in the langpacks as well? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 15:12:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 10:12:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021512.n02FCXDa007062@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #7 from Alexander Kahl 2009-01-02 10:12:32 EDT --- The name of the fonts in the unit test is hardcoded.. I'm trying hard to avoid patching the source file; it seems there are no checks on whether the expected list of files really refers to the Vera family, I could make the symlinks point to the DejaVu family I guess. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 16:30:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:30:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477482] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901021630.n02GUUdf020236@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477482 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-02 11:30:29 EDT --- Thanks, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478634 and https://gna.org/bugs/index.php?12810 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 00:31:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 19:31:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030031.n030Vorr018008@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Sven Lankes changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 01:07:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 20:07:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030107.n031788K023413@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ivazqueznet at gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams 2009-01-02 20:07:08 EDT --- GPLv2+ is a bad license for fonts in Fedora. I recommend you find a suitable replacement. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal_considerations_for_fonts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Sat Jan 3 03:49:16 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 19:49:16 -0800 Subject: [Bug 70132] Support @font-face In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030349.n033nGuf020516@mrapp52.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70132 Bug 70132 depends on bug 468218, which changed state. Bug 468218 Summary: implement @font-face { src:local() } on Linux https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468218 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 09:17:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:17:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478634] Have upstream use fontconfig In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030917.n039HGVm024477@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478634 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 09:22:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:22:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030922.n039M5f9025458@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-03 04:22:05 EDT --- Ideally, one per font family. It's not an obligation yet, but the obligation text is already in FPC's queue. But do check with upstream the font origin and licensing. It may be they're not all licensed in a Fedora-compatible way, or that they're already packaged somewhere else. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 09:23:39 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:23:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030923.n039NdJv025637@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-03 04:23:38 EDT --- See also https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-fonts-list/2008-December/msg00020.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 09:28:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030928.n039S03R007584@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-03 04:27:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > GPLv2+ is a bad license for fonts in Fedora. True. Nevertheless currently we do accept GPL-only fonts in Fedora, as long as their packagers continue to try to locate right holders and add the FSF Font exception to the license. There are just too many GPL-only fonts :( Just don't use them to create PDFs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 09:42:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 04:42:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901030942.n039gNIY029068@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-03 04:42:22 EDT --- It's worth a try. You could also remind upstream to add fontconfig support so it can auto-discover system fonts like other apps -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 14:12:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:12:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477422] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901031412.n03ECsBE029356@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 Balint Cristian changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 14:12:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:12:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901031412.n03ECtoR029385@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477422, which changed state. Bug 477422 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 15:44:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 10:44:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901031544.n03FiEBv012891@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 --- Comment #3 from Sven Lankes 2009-01-03 10:44:13 EDT --- I have contacted the author and asked about his thoughts on relicensing as GPL + Font Exceptions. Considering that all his websites are down (and have been down for quite a while) I'm not sure the email will ever reach him (at least I haven't received a bounce for it). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 3 17:38:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 12:38:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478695] New: Firefox crashes in pango-hangul-fc.so Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Firefox crashes in pango-hangul-fc.so https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478695 Summary: Firefox crashes in pango-hangul-fc.so Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: pango AssignedTo: besfahbo at redhat.com ReportedBy: mcepl at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Created an attachment (id=328111) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328111) Backtrace from crashed firefox Description of problem: When running wikipedia search in Ctrl-K query dialog in Firefox, firefox crashed with the attached backtrace. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): firefox-3.0.5-1.fc10.i386 pango-1.22.3-1.fc10.i386 xulrunner-1.9.0.5-1.fc10.i386 How reproducible: happened once -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 10:02:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 05:02:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041002.n04A2m6L029125@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) --- Comment #14 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 05:02:44 EDT --- Please adapt to the new guidelines ; that should be easy and simplify your spec quite a bit -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 10:06:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 05:06:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041006.n04A6r34014356@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Flag| |fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 05:06:51 EDT --- Hi Ankur, This looks quite good and you've progressed a lot since your first submissions. However, you need to adapt this spec file to the new templates, like for your other submissions -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 10:29:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 05:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478570] Review Request: RiordonFancy-fonts - A stylized font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041029.n04ATceP018395@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478570 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Flag| |fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(ivazqueznet at gmail | |.com) --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 05:29:37 EDT --- Thank you for packaging a new font. Initial remarks: ? you should convert to the new Fedora packaging templates. That will make Behdad happy and simplify your spec file quite a bit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template (plain text version in fontpackages-devel) ? please use lowercase package name to keep consistency with other font packages such as dejavu-fonts ? You have more complete fontconfig templates that just need filing in fontpackages-devel (please send them upstream for inclusion in the font archive when you're happy with them) ? please ask upstream to add a detached txt license file, a readme and a fontlog. The OFL is quite specific about stuff like reserved font names, that require documentation in the license text and fontlog ? this font is available in the Open Font Library. Please ask upstream what the canonical home should be. If it is the Open Font Library, add the oflb- prefix to the fontname ? please add a page to the wiki that describes this font and will be referenced in the F11 release notes, using this template: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_description_template (see also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle ) ? NEEDINFO while this is being taken care of -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 10:56:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 05:56:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041056.n04AuERr006792@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Flag| |fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(sven at lank.es) --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 05:56:13 EDT --- Hi Sven, Thank you for this new font package! Dustimo is a neat font that suffers from a missing upstream. We'll accept it nevertheless, but please continue to try getting an upstream response even after the package integration (sfd sources, addition of the font exception to the license). Anyway: ? Right now the best font source is probably Debian, as the font was created for this distribution. They have a more current dustimo.zip in their ttf-dustin package (20030318) ? Please make separate sans and sans-serif subpackages using the multi template in fontpackages-devel ? Please add fontconfig declarations to each subpackage. It's not difficult, just fill in the basic template in fontpackages-devel (you can ask for help on the list if you have a problem at some point) ? you don't really need to add an archivename if its value is the same as fontname ? please don't deviate from the template and use the provided macros or we'll have no end of problems lates ? NEEDINFO till this is taken care of -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 10:59:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 05:59:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477406] kdeedu: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041059.n04AxoZL024094@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477406 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 05:59:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Domestic_manners is currently not on the wishlist - it is here > http://www.urbanfonts.com/fonts/Domestic_Manners.htm So just add a new entry in the wishlist, and package the font :p -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 11:20:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 06:20:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041120.n04BKYW6011751@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 Ankur Sinha changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) | --- Comment #15 from Ankur Sinha 2009-01-04 06:20:33 EDT --- hi, packages : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/cf-bonveno-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-2.fc10.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/cf-bonveno-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts.spec Im not too sure of line 53 : install -pm 644 *.ttf %{buildroot}%{fontdir} The new spec template says "change *.ttf to where your files actually are". I dint quite get that. Also, rpmlint for the rpm gives this warning.. : "cf-bonveno-fonts.noarch: W: symlink-should-be-relative /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-cf-bonveno.conf /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-cf-bonveno.conf" so there must be something wrong in the "ln ... " command.. line 61. I havent been able to correct that either. regards, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 14:14:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 09:14:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041414.n04EEt71030680@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477402, which changed state. Bug 477402 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 14:14:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 09:14:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041414.n04EEsbv030655@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 Andy Shevchenko changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #4 from Andy Shevchenko 2009-01-04 09:14:53 EDT --- As I described in [1] the jack-audio-connection-kit is a good package. Please, fix doxygen instead and feel reopen this bug lately. I can put then requirements of new doxygen package if you want to. [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-January/msg00117.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Sun Jan 4 15:27:26 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (doxygen (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 566515] New: Do not include font files in generated doc Message-ID: If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566515 doxygen | general | Ver: 1.5.7.1 Summary: Do not include font files in generated doc Product: doxygen Version: 1.5.7.1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: Normal Component: general AssignedTo: dimitri at stack.nl ReportedBy: Nicolas.Mailhot at LaPoste.net QAContact: dimitri at stack.nl CC: fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com GNOME version: Unspecified GNOME milestone: Unspecified Doxygen adds font files to the documentation it generates. This pauses problems to distributions as fonts are bulky and can have conflicting legal constraints. Duplicating the same font files in every doxygen-produced documentation just exacerbates the problem. Please stop distributing fonts within doxygen, and let the system manage fonts for you. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402#c2 -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566515. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 15:31:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:31:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478747] New: Do not include font files in generated doc Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Do not include font files in generated doc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478747 Summary: Do not include font files in generated doc Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: doxygen AssignedTo: than at redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: than at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Blocks: 446451 Classification: Fedora Doxygen adds font files to the documentation it generates. This pauses problems to Fedora as fonts are bulky and can have conflicting legal constraints. Duplicating the same font files in every doxygen-produced documentation just exacerbates the problem. Please stop distributing fonts within doxygen, and let the system manage fonts for you. See also bug #477402 and the referenced upstream bug -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 15:49:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041549.n04FngtJ015120@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 10:49:41 EDT --- See also http://fpaste.org/paste/694 So the basic update path just works, and something else must be confusing yum or pinning the old conflicting packages on ajax' system -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 15:55:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:55:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477481] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041555.n04FtfK7016311@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477481 Jon Stanley changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jonstanley at gmail.com Blocks| |182235 Depends on|182235 | --- Comment #5 from Jon Stanley 2009-01-04 10:55:40 EDT --- fixing dependencies as not to bring FE-LEGAL into F11Target :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:07:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:07:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041607.n04G72i6000733@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #2 from Adam Jackson 2009-01-04 11:07:01 EDT --- Hilariously, I can't upgrade yum (at least not with the rawhide repos enabled) to see if this is fixed already, for much the same reason: python abi change -> inkscape -> poppler -> openoffice -> fonts -> doom. I installed yum-3.2.20-5.fc10 from koji by hand, but it produces the same failure when trying to install rawhide python packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:07:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:07:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-sfd-fonts - Old Standard Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041607.n04G7gSj000798@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 --- Comment #26 from Ankur Sinha 2009-01-04 11:07:40 EDT --- hi, packages : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard_sfd_fonts/oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard_sfd_fonts/oldstandard-sfd-fonts-2.0.2-2.fc10.src.rpm same warning with the rpm for this package too : "oldstandard-sfd-fonts.noarch: W: symlink-should-be-relative /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-oldstandard.conf /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-oldstandard.conf " hope its okay other than that. @pablo : ive just really replaced the "font name" and "generic name" etc in the fontconfig template that nicolas has given. I dont exactly understand it. hope its okay other than that.. regards, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:09:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:09:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041609.n04G9tB4018375@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 11:09:54 EDT --- dejavu-fonts-compat.noarch should have cleaned up the old dejavu-fonts package and is in the transaction set, so yum is doing something strange -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:16:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:16:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041616.n04GGuN4002293@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477402, which changed state. Bug 477402 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:20:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:20:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-sfd-fonts - Old Standard Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041620.n04GKeFA003083@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 --- Comment #27 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 11:20:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) > same warning with the rpm for this package too : > "oldstandard-sfd-fonts.noarch: W: symlink-should-be-relative > /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-oldstandard.conf > /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-oldstandard.conf > " You can ignore this warning for now, it's not even sure if we'll keep in in Fedora rpmlint http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Absolute_symlinks_in_fonts_templates_%282009-01-02%29 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:20:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:20:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041620.n04GK0vg002546@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 seth vidal changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |svidal at redhat.com --- Comment #4 from seth vidal 2009-01-04 11:19:59 EDT --- If a pkg contains files which conflict with another pkg then you have to have a Conflicts: line in the spec file - this is listed in Fedora's Packaging Guidelines. It is nicer b/c it means yum can tell if there is a conflict without having ALL of the file metadata (including checksums). There appears to be a conflict that we cannot upgrade out of. Ajax: have you made any changes to your yum.conf? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:16:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041616.n04GGtaV002267@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 11:16:54 EDT --- I've filled bug #478747 on doxygen if that makes you feel better, but really, it's an easy fix in your package and there's no reason to postpone the fix till the tools you use are eventually fixed upstream -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:25:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:25:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041625.n04GPw3o021087@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #5 from Adam Jackson 2009-01-04 11:25:57 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328141) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328141) /etc/yum.conf Not that I'm aware of. yum.conf from the affected machine is attached. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:28:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:28:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041628.n04GSQH8004204@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #6 from Adam Jackson 2009-01-04 11:28:26 EDT --- Well, okay, not in a way that should affect this. installonly_limit is clearly my own doing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 16:29:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:29:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041629.n04GTjXg004349@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 Ankur Sinha changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) | --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha 2009-01-04 11:29:44 EDT --- hi, packages: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/beteckna-0.3/beteckna-sfd-fonts-0.3-2.fc10.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/beteckna-0.3/beteckna-sfd-fonts.spec Gives this error while building packages..During the build using fontforge.."FindMatchinHVEdge didn't" I havent been able to understad what it is..Packages build normally though.. Getting this warning here too with rpmlint : "beteckna-sfd-fonts.noarch: W: symlink-should-be-relative /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-beteckna.conf /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-beteckna.conf" regards, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:00:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:00:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041700.n04H0DDq009455@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 12:00:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) > The new spec template says "change *.ttf to where your files actually are". I > dint quite get that. You did ok, I've tried to clarify the wiki page ping me if it's still unclear > Also, rpmlint for the rpm gives this warning.. : "cf-bonveno-fonts.noarch: W: > symlink-should-be-relative /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-cf-bonveno.conf > /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-cf-bonveno.conf" This is an rpmlint of dubious utility that will be discussed by FPC soonish. In the meanwhile, ignore it http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Absolute_symlinks_in_fonts_templates_%282009-01-02%29 Please make your fontconfig file adhere more closely to the basic template in fontpackages-devel. Otherwise, everything else seems fine -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:00:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:00:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041700.n04H0a28026757@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) --- Comment #17 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 12:00:35 EDT --- . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:10:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:10:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041710.n04HAshI028588@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477402, which changed state. Bug 477402 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:10:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041710.n04HArxD028564@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 Andy Shevchenko changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |0.116.1-3.fc11 Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Andy Shevchenko 2009-01-04 12:10:52 EDT --- I have built new package which doesn't include any font: [root at dhcppc55 ~]# rpm -qlp /home/andy/RPM/RPMS/i386/jack-audio-connection-kit-* | grep -E '.(ttf|pfa|pfb|ofa)$' [root at dhcppc55 ~]# Thanks for report! Koji logs: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=77084 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:21:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:21:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041721.n04HLLGx030411@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-04 12:21:20 EDT --- jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:23:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:23:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041723.n04HN8dB030640@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-04 12:23:08 EDT --- jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:29:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:29:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477460] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041729.n04HTqj6031521@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 --- Comment #2 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-04 12:29:51 EDT --- Because, it's look like, that the stellarium package will contains fontsfile for the DeJaVU-Sans and DEJAVU-SansMono files, it may be right to remove this files from the packabe and add Req. to the dejavu-fonts packages? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 17:51:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 12:51:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041751.n04HpILP017667@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 12:51:16 EDT --- Looks nice so here is a complete review: 1. probably better to use %define archivename %{fontname}-%{version} 2. The summary needs a little work (for example 'Geometric sans-serif font inspired by Futura') 3. you do not need to add "sfd" to the name, renaming is only a requirement for OFL fonts, GPL does not require it 4. beteckna.se seems dead, no need to reference it in the description 5. we already have a licensing field, do not include "The font is free, licensed under terms of the GNU GPL" in the description 6. You're wrapping your description lines too short, Fedora standard is 79 columns not 50 7. do package AUTHORS LICENSE CHANGELOG as %doc too 8. I see beteckna is actually 3 different font families: Beteckna, BetecknaLowerCase, Beteckna Small Caps. Please package them in 3 different subpackages using the -multi template (the two families which do not have a correct uppercase/lowercase mix are probably more "fantasy" than "sans-serif" fonts anyway) 9.[not a blocker] Please ask upstream to consider adding the FSF Font exception to their licensing so the font can be used by people who embed fonts in PDF files 10. Please change the category of the wiki page describing the font so other packagers see they need not work on it http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Beteckna_fonts (see the help in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_description_template ) You do not need a packager sponsorship for this, just a Fedora FAS account Anyway that's all mostly small stuff and nothing that should be too hard for you to fix. ? NEEDINFO in the meanwhile -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:00:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:00:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041800.n04I0gGZ004353@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477460, which changed state. Bug 477460 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:00:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:00:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477460] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041800.n04I0fKa004332@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 Jochen Schmitt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-04 13:00:40 EDT --- I have try to create such a solution. But stellarium will starts to complaints about missing files, if the fontsfiles are not exists on /usr/share/stellarium/data. Because the packaging policy say, that create a font subpackage make only sense, if other applications may benefits from it, I have avoid this solution, because the dejavu fonts are available for other applications as a existing package of the fedora repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:05:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:05:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041805.n04I5bk5020534@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 13:05:36 EDT --- PS for the fontforge warning, ask on the fontforge mailing list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:03:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:03:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041803.n04I3o8d019945@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477460, which changed state. Bug 477460 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:03:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:03:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477460] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041803.n04I3ovR019921@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 13:03:49 EDT --- There's no reason not to fix it, use symlinks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 18:03:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:03:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477460] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041803.n04I3LA7019872@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-04 13:03:20 EDT --- If your package only need those two dejavu families, please remove them and add deps on the corresponding dejavu packages. (plus a set of symlinks in your package if stellarium can not find system fonts; in that case also remind upstream to add fontconfig support so you don't need to carry the symlinks forever) Please do so in fedora-devel *only*. Be aware that the set of dejavu packages available in fedora-devel have different names and deps than in F9 and F10, so you need to reference the new names for this stuff to work (probably dejavu-fonts-sans-mono and dejavu-fonts-sans) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 19:01:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041901.n04J1b6Y029967@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477460, which changed state. Bug 477460 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 19:01:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:01:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477460] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041901.n04J1ad9029946@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477460 Jochen Schmitt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-04 14:01:35 EDT --- Bug should be fixed at stellarium-0.10.0-2 at rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 19:08:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:08:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041908.n04J8GEc031102@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 James Antill changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #7 from James Antill 2009-01-04 14:08:15 EDT --- I'm pretty sure this is obsoletes related, not conflict. From a list obsoletes I see: dejavu-fonts-compat.noarch 2.28-1.fc11 rawhide dejavu-fonts-experimental.noarch 2.24-3.fc9 installed dejavu-fonts-compat.noarch 2.28-1.fc11 rawhide dejavu-fonts.noarch 2.24-3.fc9 installed ...my guess is that the 'yum install python-twyt' path is only processing one (or maybe zero) of the above obsoletes. We might have fixed this already in 3.2.20-8 ... but can you run the above install command with "-d 9", as that'll hopefully tell us what obsoletes that single update line is doing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 19:28:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:28:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901041928.n04JSfvg018761@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 Adam Jackson changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #8 from Adam Jackson 2009-01-04 14:28:39 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328150) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328150) output of 'yum -d9 install python-twyt' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From tessarakt at openoffice.org Sun Jan 4 19:39:58 2009 From: tessarakt at openoffice.org (tessarakt at openoffice.org) Date: 4 Jan 2009 19:39:58 -0000 Subject: [Issue 69129] Add support for Graphite font technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090104193958.26272.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=69129 User tessarakt changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'fedorafonts,hdu,nmailhot,|'fedorafonts,hdu,nmailhot, |pagalmes,pl,pmike' |pagalmes,pl,pmike,tessarak | |t' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From tessarakt at openoffice.org Sun Jan 4 19:40:25 2009 From: tessarakt at openoffice.org (tessarakt at openoffice.org) Date: 4 Jan 2009 19:40:25 -0000 Subject: [Issue 93645] Add a Graphite module to support Graphite Smart Fonts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090104194025.26701.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=93645 User tessarakt changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'fedorafonts,hjs,rene' |'fedorafonts,hjs,rene,tess | |arakt' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 4 21:31:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:31:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901042131.n04LVrsM022062@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Sven Lankes changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(sven at lank.es) | --- Comment #5 from Sven Lankes 2009-01-04 16:31:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) Spec-URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/dustismo-fonts.spec SRPM-URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/dustismo-fonts-20030318-1.fc11.src.rpm Updated SPEC - the spec should address all the issues you listed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Sun Jan 4 21:59:59 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gnome-control-center (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 21:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 378338] Deal with X servers which misreport the screen's dimensions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090104220000.3C01F23F51E@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378338 gnome-control-center | settings-daemon | Ver: trunk soc changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |soc at krg-nw.de ------- Comment #51 from soc 2009-01-04 21:59 UTC ------- I can confirm this. The bug is not fixed in GNOME 2.24.1 (Ubuntu 8.10). -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378338. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 00:05:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 19:05:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050005.n0505gS6031332@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #10 from James Antill 2009-01-04 19:05:42 EDT --- Or apply the fix by hand, if you're really feeling lucky:) http://yum.baseurl.org/gitweb?p=yum.git;a=commitdiff;h=f203d754c952c4f117ed8ddbb09dda9ba237dacd -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 00:04:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 19:04:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050004.n0504FvW030889@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 James Antill changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |UPSTREAM --- Comment #9 from James Antill 2009-01-04 19:04:14 EDT --- This should now be fixed in upstream commit: f203d754c952c4f117ed8ddbb09dda9ba237dacd This'll be in 3.2.21 which should be released "soon". Or you can just "yum update deja\*" for the time being. Or you can try "Running an upstream yum-3.2.* locally" instructions from: http://yum.baseurl.org/ ...to get around it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 01:59:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 20:59:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050159.n051xv8k015899@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #11 from Adam Jackson 2009-01-04 20:59:56 EDT --- I'm a lucky kind of guy. That fixes it, thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 05:09:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 00:09:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050509.n0559G83016167@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477428, which changed state. Bug 477428 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 05:09:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 00:09:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477428] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050509.n0559GwT016141@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-05 00:09:14 EDT --- Added a Requires: bitstream-vera-fonts-sans-mono to munin and a ln to the font there. Should be all fixed in rawhide now. Feel free to re-open or file a new bug if you spot anything wrong with it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 06:59:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 01:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477428] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050659.n056x1SI004017@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-05 01:59:00 EDT --- Please consider linking the dejavu version of the same font instead since this one will already be installed on most systems -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 09:02:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:02:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478786] xfig: Can't find -urw-nimbus roman no9 l-medium-r-normal--8-*-*-*-*-*-ISO8859-*, using 6x13 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050902.n0592B98026685@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478786 Hans de Goede changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com, than at redhat.com Component|xfig |urw-fonts AssignedTo|skasal at redhat.com |than at redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Hans de Goede 2009-01-05 04:02:05 EDT --- This is not an xfig problem then, but an urw-fonts problem, and one which I believe is already fixed, but I'll leave judging that to the urw-fonts maintainer. Changing component and re-assigning. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cmc at openoffice.org Mon Jan 5 09:37:45 2009 From: cmc at openoffice.org (cmc at openoffice.org) Date: 5 Jan 2009 09:37:45 -0000 Subject: [Issue 43029] support PS-OpenType/OTF/(SFNT with CFF) fonts for PDF export and printing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090105093745.7182.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=43029 User cmc changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ OtherIssuesDependingOnTh|16032,30202 |16032,30202,97765 is| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From cmc at openoffice.org Mon Jan 5 09:38:27 2009 From: cmc at openoffice.org (cmc at openoffice.org) Date: 5 Jan 2009 09:38:27 -0000 Subject: [Issue 79878] OO.o can not select modern font faces conveniently In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090105093827.8861.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=79878 User cmc changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ OtherIssuesDependingOnTh|2867,43495,81913,82986 |2867,43495,81913,82986,977 is| |65 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 09:40:27 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:40:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477435] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050940.n059eRsY017305@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477435 Caolan McNamara changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 09:40:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 04:40:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901050940.n059eSvj017330@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477435, which changed state. Bug 477435 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477435 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 13:21:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 08:21:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 434753] Sometimes can't display VLGothic via "sansserif" family. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901051321.n05DLnOl000764@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434753 --- Comment #11 from Makoto Mizukami 2009-01-05 08:21:46 EDT --- Frankly speaking, I cannot represent this issue. I have tested two applications, Adobe's flash and xine-ui. Adobe Flash: This problem didn't occur in both current F10 fontconfig and new F11 fontconfig(however, I think F11 config's appearnce is much better than F10 one, but it's not a problem). xine-ui: Japanese letters didn't displayed at all in both settings. It seems another problem. I give a lot of thanks to your great effort. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 14:57:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 09:57:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901051457.n05EvMil024546@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-05 09:57:20 EDT --- So are you proposing: moodle moodle-fonts moodle-sm moodle-sm-fonts moodle-km moodle-km-fonts moodle-to moodle-to-fonts ? This is acceptable to me, if that's what you mean. Putting them all into one -fonts would mean that every installation would require any language that included fonts, which is highly broken. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nmailhot at openoffice.org Mon Jan 5 17:42:26 2009 From: nmailhot at openoffice.org (nmailhot at openoffice.org) Date: 5 Jan 2009 17:42:26 -0000 Subject: [Issue 96826] Add font autoinstallation support In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090105174226.21236.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=96826 User nmailhot changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ OtherIssuesDependingOnTh| |97765 is| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 18:17:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:17:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901051817.n05IHOSO002534@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net |sven at lank.es Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-05 13:17:23 EDT --- This looks good, a variant on the multi template I hadn't seen before, but it works. Please also consider adding a dustin- prefix to the package name especially if you intend to package more fonts by the same author (This is a proposed guideline which is not official yet, so I won't block on it. However if the guideline is approved you'll earn a renaming later.) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2008-12-22) Anyway, the package is ??? APPROVED ??? You can continue on from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a Reassigning as I've done my part. Return review of bug #475661 would be appreciated (wink wink) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 19:10:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:10:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477369] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901051910.n05JAQx8016383@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477369 Lillian Angel changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 19:10:27 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:10:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901051910.n05JARrn016409@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477369, which changed state. Bug 477369 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477369 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:02:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:02:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052002.n05K2aT4027359@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477370, which changed state. Bug 477370 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:02:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:02:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052002.n05K2aP2027335@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 Jochen Schmitt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-05 15:02:35 EDT --- Because the font file which was detected by your bot is a hidden file (dot file) it makes not sense to create a seperate subpackage for the fonts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:28:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:28:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052028.n05KSvom000383@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477370, which changed state. Bug 477370 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:28:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:28:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052028.n05KSuJH000349@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-05 15:28:55 EDT --- Hidden or not that does not change one bit the licensing considerations that made FPC and FESCO adopt the aforementioned guidelines Please adapt your package to them -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:42:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:42:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052042.n05KghSv003835@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-05 15:42:42 EDT --- Actually, I think you can simplify your problem considerably. Opening a few moodle fonts in the gnome font preview/in fontforge shows they are either arial narrow (not OK for Fedora licensing wise) or a khmerOS font (already packaged separately) So I suggest you just check each font, see if it's legit for Fedora or already packaged, and report back if you actually find a font in moodle we can ship which is not already packaged somewhere else BTW it's also a good idea to notify upstream they are shipping dubious material licensing-wise Just shows this font audit was really needed :( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 20:57:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:57:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052057.n05KvmHw006739@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Sven Lankes changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Sven Lankes 2009-01-05 15:57:47 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: dustin-dustismo-fonts Short Description: General purpose fonts in serif and sans-serif versions Owners: slankes Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: fonts-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 21:16:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:16:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901052116.n05LGQii022952@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |478891 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 5 21:16:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:16:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: wqy-zenhei-fonts AssignedTo: fangqq at gmail.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: petersen at redhat.com, fangqq at gmail.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs at redhat.com Blocks: 477044 Classification: Fedora This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or several font files: repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb' -f '*.pfa' '*.ttc' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e 's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq Unfortunately this script does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can close this bug report now. Otherwise, you should know that: ? Fedora guidelines demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package (or subpackage): http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_in_other_packages ? our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel package: ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2008-11-18) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Please make your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide (you can use the fontpackages package in F9 or F10 to test, but only submit changes to rawhide please). If your package is not principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed in the correct fontconfig directories. It is preferred to create a font package or subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a font family is given on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family The new templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe. The following packages have already been converted by their packager and can serve as examples: ? andika-fonts ? apanov-heuristica-fonts ? bitstream-vera-fonts ? charis-fonts ? dejavu-fonts ? ecolier-court-fonts ? edrip-fonts ? gfs-ambrosia-fonts ? gfs-artemisia-fonts ? gfs-baskerville-fonts ? gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts ? gfs-bodoni-fonts ? gfs-complutum-fonts ? gfs-didot-classic-fonts ? gfs-didot-fonts ? gfs-eustace-fonts ? gfs-fleischman-fonts ? gfs-garaldus-fonts ? gfs-gazis-fonts ? gfs-jackson-fonts ? gfs-neohellenic-fonts ? gfs-nicefore-fonts ? gfs-olga-fonts ? gfs-porson-fonts ? gfs-solomos-fonts ? gfs-theokritos-fonts ? stix-fonts ? yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them on: fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cmc at openoffice.org Mon Jan 5 23:28:14 2009 From: cmc at openoffice.org (cmc at openoffice.org) Date: 5 Jan 2009 23:28:14 -0000 Subject: [Issue 96826] Add font autoinstallation support In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090105232814.15389.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=96826 User cmc changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ OtherIssuesDependingOnTh|97765 | is| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 01:22:00 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 01:22:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.22,1.23 Message-ID: <20090106012200.643A770125@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17600 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: * Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) modified .spec file according to guidelines Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.22 retrieving revision 1.23 diff -u -r1.22 -r1.23 --- cjkunifonts.spec 7 Dec 2008 09:13:01 -0000 1.22 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:21:29 -0000 1.23 @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +%define fontname cjkunifonts +%define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} +%define archivename %{name}-%{version} +%define common_desc \ +Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made +available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended +by the CJK Unifonts project. + + %define umingfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-uming %define ukaifontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-ukai %define fcdir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d @@ -7,10 +16,9 @@ %define umingbuilddir ../%{name}-uming-%{version} %define ukaibuilddir ../%{name}-ukai-%{version} -Name: cjkunifonts +Name: %{fontname} Version: 0.2.20080216.1 -Release: 10.fc11 -#Release: 9.1%{?dist} +Release: 11%{?dist} Summary: Chinese TrueType Fonts -- Simplified and Traditional Chinese Ming and Kai Face License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X @@ -26,24 +34,25 @@ Source8: CIDFnmap.zh_CN Patch1: cjkunifonts-0.2.20080216.1-2.patch -BuildRequires: xorg-x11-font-utils, ttmkfdir +BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel, xorg-x11-font-utils, ttmkfdir %description -Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made -available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended -by the CJK Unifonts project. +%common_desc %package uming Summary: Chinese Uming style face TrueType Font License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem Conflicts: fonts-chinese <= 3.03-9.fc8 Obsoletes: fonts-chinese < 3.03-13 Obsoletes: ttfonts-zh_CN <= 2.14-10, ttfonts-zh_TW <= 2.11-28 %description uming +%common_desc + Chinese Uming style face TrueType Font derived from the original fonts released by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. @@ -51,11 +60,14 @@ Summary: Chinese Ukai style face TrueType font License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem Conflicts: fonts-chinese <= 3.03-9.fc8 Obsoletes: fonts-chinese < 3.03-13 Obsoletes: ttfonts-zh_CN <= 2.14-10, ttfonts-zh_TW <= 2.11-28 %description ukai +%common_desc + Chinese Ukai style face TrueType Font derived from the original fonts released by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. @@ -68,55 +80,59 @@ %{nil} %install -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -rf %{buildroot} # dirs -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue} -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{umingfontdir} -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{ukaifontdir} +install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +install -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} +install -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} # ttfs -install -m 0644 %{umingbuilddir}/uming.ttc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{umingfontdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{ukaibuilddir}/ukai.ttc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{ukaifontdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{umingbuilddir}/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{ukaibuilddir}/ukai.ttc %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir}/ # fonts.{scale,dir} -%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{umingfontdir} -o $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{umingfontdir}/fonts.scale -mkfontdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{umingfontdir} -%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{ukaifontdir} -o $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{ukaifontdir}/fonts.scale -mkfontdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{ukaifontdir} +%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} -o %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir}/fonts.scale +mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} +%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} -o %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir}/fonts.scale +mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} # fontconfig config files -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fcdir} -for conf in `ls %{umingbuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` +install -d %{buildroot}%{fcdir} +for fconf in `ls %{umingbuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $conf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fcdir}/ + install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{fcdir}/ + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done -for conf in `ls %{ukaibuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` +for fconf in `ls %{ukaibuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $conf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fcdir}/ + install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{fcdir}/ + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done # backward compat -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType -%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf -%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf +install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType +install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType +%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf +%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf # catalogue -%{__ln_s} %{umingfontdir} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue}/%{name}-uming -%{__ln_s} %{ukaifontdir} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai +%{__ln_s} %{umingfontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-uming +%{__ln_s} %{ukaifontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai # ghostscript -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir} -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE3} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE4} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE5} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE6} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE7} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE8} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ +install -d %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir} +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE3} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE4} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE5} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE6} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE7} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -m 0644 %{SOURCE8} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ %clean -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -fr ${buildroot} %post uming if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then @@ -143,7 +159,7 @@ fi %files uming -%defattr(-,root,root,-) +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc %{umingbuilddir}/license %doc %{umingbuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS %doc %{umingbuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ShanHeiSun_UMing.odt @@ -174,7 +190,7 @@ %{catalogue}/%{name}-uming %files ukai -%defattr(-,root,root,-) +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/license %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ZenKai_UKai.odt @@ -199,6 +215,9 @@ %{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai %changelog +* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) + * Sun Dec 7 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 0.2.20080216.1-10.fc11 - Don't umask before fc-cache. - Add -f to fc-cache. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 01:30:12 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 01:30:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.23,1.24 Message-ID: <20090106013012.582FE70125@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19986 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: revised from %{fcdir} to %{_fontconfig_templatedir} Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.23 retrieving revision 1.24 diff -u -r1.23 -r1.24 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:21:29 -0000 1.23 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:29:42 -0000 1.24 @@ -9,7 +9,6 @@ %define umingfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-uming %define ukaifontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-ukai -%define fcdir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d %define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d %define catalogue %{_sysconfdir}/X11/fontpath.d @@ -83,9 +82,9 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} # dirs -install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} -install -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} -install -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} # ttfs install -m 0644 %{umingbuilddir}/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir}/ @@ -98,16 +97,17 @@ mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} # fontconfig config files -install -d %{buildroot}%{fcdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} for fconf in `ls %{umingbuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{fcdir}/ + install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done for fconf in `ls %{ukaibuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{fcdir}/ + install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ %dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType %dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType %{umingfontdir}/*.ttc -%{fcdir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf +%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/TODO %dir %{ukaifontdir} %{ukaifontdir}/*.ttc -%{fcdir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf +%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 01:35:16 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 01:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.24,1.25 Message-ID: <20090106013516.4C7D670125@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21780 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: fixed %comm_desc line break Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.24 retrieving revision 1.25 diff -u -r1.24 -r1.25 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:29:42 -0000 1.24 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:34:45 -0000 1.25 @@ -2,11 +2,9 @@ %define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} %define archivename %{name}-%{version} %define common_desc \ -Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made -available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended +Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made \available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended \ by the CJK Unifonts project. - %define umingfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-uming %define ukaifontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-ukai %define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 01:49:12 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 01:49:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.25,1.26 Message-ID: <20090106014912.CB3D27013C@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv26317 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: fixed .conf ln -s path mistake Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.25 retrieving revision 1.26 diff -u -r1.25 -r1.26 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:34:45 -0000 1.25 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:48:42 -0000 1.26 @@ -100,13 +100,13 @@ for fconf in `ls %{umingbuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done for fconf in `ls %{ukaibuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 02:08:40 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.26,1.27 Message-ID: <20090106020840.3E1A570125@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv809 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: retag Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.26 retrieving revision 1.27 diff -u -r1.26 -r1.27 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 01:48:42 -0000 1.26 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 02:08:10 -0000 1.27 @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ Name: %{fontname} Version: 0.2.20080216.1 -Release: 11%{?dist} +Release: 11.1%{?dist} Summary: Chinese TrueType Fonts -- Simplified and Traditional Chinese Ming and Kai Face License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ %{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai %changelog -* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.fc11 +* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.1.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) * Sun Dec 7 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 0.2.20080216.1-10.fc11 From cchance at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 02:25:04 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:25:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.27,1.28 Message-ID: <20090106022504.AC9D170141@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7027 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: fixed .conf ln -s path mistake Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.27 retrieving revision 1.28 diff -u -r1.27 -r1.28 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 02:08:10 -0000 1.27 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 02:24:34 -0000 1.28 @@ -10,12 +10,9 @@ %define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d %define catalogue %{_sysconfdir}/X11/fontpath.d -%define umingbuilddir ../%{name}-uming-%{version} -%define ukaibuilddir ../%{name}-ukai-%{version} - Name: %{fontname} Version: 0.2.20080216.1 -Release: 11.1%{?dist} +Release: 11.2%{?dist} Summary: Chinese TrueType Fonts -- Simplified and Traditional Chinese Ming and Kai Face License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X @@ -97,18 +94,24 @@ # fontconfig config files install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} -for fconf in `ls %{umingbuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` + +cd %{name}-uming-%{version} +for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done -for fconf in `ls %{ukaibuilddir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` +cd .. + +cd %{name}-ukai-%{version} +for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done +cd .. # backward compat install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType @@ -213,7 +216,7 @@ %{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai %changelog -* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.1.fc11 +* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.2.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) * Sun Dec 7 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 0.2.20080216.1-10.fc11 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 02:44:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:44:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 450709] xorg-x11-fonts-Type1 doesn't update cache files on upgrade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901060244.n062i6Ro003009@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450709 --- Comment #12 from Jens Petersen 2009-01-05 21:44:04 EDT --- Ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Tue Jan 6 07:15:30 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:15:30 -0800 Subject: [Bug 70132] Support @font-face In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901060715.n067FUAq015143@mrapp51.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=70132 Bug 70132 depends on bug 458160, which changed state. Bug 458160 Summary: [PATCH] Can't use .otf fonts via @font-face on Windows https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458160 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 07:26:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:26:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901060726.n067Qj4n000827@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-06 02:26:44 EDT --- (note that the macros used in the new templates are integral part of the new guidelines) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From pravins at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 6 09:31:10 2009 From: pravins at fedoraproject.org (Pravin Satpute) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 09:31:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/smc-fonts/devel smc-fonts.spec,1.2,1.3 Message-ID: <20090106093110.2B1ED70108@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: pravins Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/smc-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14333 Modified Files: smc-fonts.spec Log Message: * Tue Jan 06 2009 Pravin Satpute 04.1-2 - bugfix 477458 - updated spec Index: smc-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/smc-fonts/devel/smc-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- smc-fonts.spec 29 Jul 2008 09:14:48 -0000 1.2 +++ smc-fonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 09:30:39 -0000 1.3 @@ -1,25 +1,38 @@ -%define fontname smc -%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} -%define fontconfdir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d +%define fontname smc +%define fontconf 90-%{fontname} + +# Common description +%define common_desc \ +The smc-fonts package contains fonts for the display of\ +traditional and new Malayalam Script. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 04.1 -Release: 1%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv3+ with exceptions and GPLv2+ with exceptions and GPLv2+ and GPLv2 URL: http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/smc Source: http://download.savannah.nongnu.org/releases/smc/fonts/malayalam-fonts-%{version}.zip BuildArch: noarch +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) %description -The smc-fonts package contains fonts for the display of -traditional and new Malayalam Script. +%common_desc + +%package common +Summary: Common files for smc-fonts +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem + +%description common +%common_desc %package dyuthi Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions %description dyuthi The smc-fonts-dyuthi package contains fonts for the display of @@ -28,6 +41,7 @@ %package meera Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2+ with exceptions %description meera The smc-fonts-meera package contains fonts for the display of @@ -37,6 +51,7 @@ %package rachana Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2+ %description rachana The smc-fonts-rachana package contains fonts for the display of @@ -46,6 +61,7 @@ %package raghumalayalam Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2 %description raghumalayalam The smc-fonts-malayalam package contains fonts for the display of @@ -54,6 +70,7 @@ %package suruma Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions %description suruma The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of @@ -62,6 +79,7 @@ %package kalyani Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions %description kalyani The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of @@ -70,11 +88,27 @@ %package anjalioldlipi Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions %description anjalioldlipi The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. +#%{_fontdir} is shared by following packages since they all are for malayalam script only +%_font_pkg -n dyuthi Dyuthi*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n meera -f 90-%{fontname}-fonts.conf Meera*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n rachana Rachana*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n raghumalayalam RaghuMalayalamSans*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n suruma suruma*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n kalyani Kalyani*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n anjalioldlipi AnjaliOldLipi.ttf + %prep %setup -q -n malayalam-fonts-04 @@ -82,145 +116,31 @@ echo "Nothing to do in Build." %install - rm -rf %{buildroot} -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir} -install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{fontdir} -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{fontconfdir} -install -m 0644 -p $RPM_BUILD_DIR/malayalam-fonts-04/malayalam-fonts.conf %{buildroot}%{fontconfdir}/90-%{fontname}.conf +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} +install -m 0644 -p $RPM_BUILD_DIR/malayalam-fonts-04/malayalam-fonts.conf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-fonts.conf +for fconf in %{fontconf}-fonts.conf ; do + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf +done %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} -%post dyuthi -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post meera -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post rachana -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post raghumalayalam -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post suruma -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post kalyani -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%post anjalioldlipi -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%postun dyuthi -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun meera -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun rachana -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun raghumalayalam -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun suruma -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun kalyani -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi - -%postun anjalioldlipi -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then -%{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi -#%{fontdir} is shared by following packages since they all are for malayalam script only -%files dyuthi +%files common %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/Dyuthi*.ttf - -%files meera -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%config(noreplace) %{fontconfdir}/90-%{fontname}.conf -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/Meera*.ttf - -%files rachana -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/Rachana*.ttf - -%files raghumalayalam -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/RaghuMalayalamSans*.ttf - -%files suruma -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/suruma*.ttf - -%files kalyani -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/Kalyani*.ttf - -%files anjalioldlipi -%defattr(-,root,root,-) -%doc *.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/AnjaliOldLipi.ttf +%dir %{_fontdir} %changelog +* Tue Jan 06 2009 Pravin Satpute 04.1-2 +- bugfix 477458 +- updated spec + * Tue Jul 29 2008 Pravin Satpute 04.1-1 - new upstream release - fontconfig rule for size adjustment of Meera is added From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 09:39:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 04:39:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477458] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901060939.n069dBPO026417@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477458 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED --- Comment #2 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-06 04:39:10 EDT --- updated specs, It will be in tomorrows rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 10:14:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477458] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901061014.n06AElG0001686@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477458 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-06 05:14:46 EDT --- Thank you very much for looking at this -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 14:26:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 09:26:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901061426.n06EQGnQ023415@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-06 09:26:15 EDT --- Here's what I found: ./lang/km_utf8/fonts/default.ttf Packaged in khmeros-fonts-base, can be symlinked and required. ./lang/sm_utf8/fonts/default.ttf ./lang/to_utf8/fonts/default.ttf Arial Narrow, not OK. I can modify the source to strip this out, and then symlink to something, what would be a good replacement? I'll then notify upstream. ./lib/default.ttf - FreeSans - Copyleft, can be subpackaged, but it might be packaged already, what's a good way to check? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 16:09:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:09:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901061609.n06G9DOY016174@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-i18n-bugs at redhat.com --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-06 11:09:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > Here's what I found: > > ./lang/km_utf8/fonts/default.ttf > Packaged in khmeros-fonts-base, can be symlinked and required. But make sure that the khmeros-fonts packager converted to the new guidelines first > ./lang/sm_utf8/fonts/default.ttf > ./lang/to_utf8/fonts/default.ttf > Arial Narrow, not OK. I can modify the source to strip this out, and then > symlink to something, what would be a good replacement? > I'll then notify upstream. No idea, maybe ask Jens Petersen? > ./lib/default.ttf - FreeSans - Copyleft, can be subpackaged, but it might be > packaged already, what's a good way to check? Is in the freefonts package, but it's better to require a dejavu variant when an app just wants a generic font without specific style needs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 19:30:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:30:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901061930.n06JUFMM012347@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477370, which changed state. Bug 477370 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 19:30:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:30:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901061930.n06JUEY7012322@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 Jochen Schmitt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-06 14:30:13 EDT --- Should be fixed on blender-2.49a-9. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 20:15:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:15:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062015.n06KFXLR001484@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-06 15:15:33 EDT --- (of course you should also ask upstream to add fontconfig support to blender so it does not need a private font at all) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 20:14:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:14:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062014.n06KEffh020554@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477370, which changed state. Bug 477370 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 20:14:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:14:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062014.n06KEfiw020524@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-06 15:14:40 EDT --- Actually, opening the blender ttf in the gnome font previewer (or in fontforge if you prefer) shows it is a very old copy of Dejavu Sans (2.8, rawhide is at 2.28), so it's much better to add a dep on dejavu-fonts-sans and symlink the font in blender from here -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Tue Jan 6 22:22:12 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:22:12 -0800 Subject: [Bug 455647] [Indic] Firefox displays garbage Indic characters on parts of some English webpages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062222.n06MMCJu004592@mrapp52.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=455647 Al Billings changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|fixed1.9.0.6 |verified1.9.0.6 CC| |abillings at mozilla.com --- Comment #32 from Al Billings 2009-01-06 14:22:06 PST --- Verified fixed in 1.9.0.6 with Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.6pre) Gecko/2009010604 GranParadiso/3.0.6pre. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 6 22:39:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 17:39:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476427] [te_IN] - Consonant+Virama+Consonant+Virama+space renders the second virama as a separate glyph in lohit-telugu font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062239.n06MdcQO030416@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476427 Padmanabhan V. K. changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugzillas+padREMOVETHISdu at g | |mail.com --- Comment #3 from Padmanabhan V. K. 2009-01-06 17:39:37 EDT --- Bug 318071 deals with the same problem, but for Lohit Kannada. That bug was closed with the comment that a fix "is not possible in the current opentype framework." However the Pothana2000 font from http://www.kavya-nandanam.com/dload.htm is able to render these combinations correctly. I hope Lohit Telugu and Lohit Kannada could be fixed to handle these combinations just like Pothana2000. BTW the gnome bug above says the problem isn't seen in Kannada, which isn't true. Just that the problem is less noticeable when compared to Telugu (since in Kannada the virama connects to the right of the first consonant anyway, unlike in Telugu where it connects to the top). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Tue Jan 6 23:18:50 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:18:50 -0800 Subject: [Bug 449356] Refactor gfxPangoFontGroup for user fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901062318.n06NIoth021990@mrapp52.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=449356 Bug 449356 depends on bug 461087, which changed state. Bug 461087 Summary: provide templates for automatically-releasing handles to foreign resources https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461087 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 00:04:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 19:04:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070004.n0704DwE029885@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |dustismo-fonts - font with |dustin-dustismo-fonts - |serif and sans-serif |font with serif and |versions |sans-serif versions Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-06 19:04:13 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 03:04:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 22:04:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477479] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070304.n0734B6r024061@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 Akira TAGOH changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|ryo-dairiki at users.sourcefor |tagoh at redhat.com |ge.net | --- Comment #2 from Akira TAGOH 2009-01-06 22:04:10 EDT --- will work on this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 06:32:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 01:32:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477479] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070632.n076WXiZ006373@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 Akira TAGOH changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) --- Comment #3 from Akira TAGOH 2009-01-07 01:32:32 EDT --- What would you suggest subpackaging for this? I guess current subpackaging may be not sufficient for new policy. as per policy, I'm going to have: - VLGothic-fonts-common for docs etc. - VLGothic-fonts-gothic for VL-Gothic-Regular.ttf with Obsoletes: VLGothic-fonts < 20081203-2 - VLGothic-fonts-pgothic or VLGothic-fonts-proportional-gothic for VL-PGothic-Regular.ttf with Obsoletes: VLGothic-fonts-proportional < 20081203-2 Does it make sense? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 07:00:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 02:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] New: [kn_IN] Conjuct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [kn_IN] Conjuct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Summary: [kn_IN] Conjuct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly Product: Fedora Version: 8 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: lohit-fonts AssignedTo: rbhalera at redhat.com ReportedBy: bugzillas+padREMOVETHISdu at gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: petersen at redhat.com, eng-i18n-bugs at redhat.com, rbhalera at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs at redhat.com Classification: Fedora +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #233257 +++ Description of problem: Wrong Conjuct combinations are formed for U0C9D+U0CCA and U0C9D+U0CCB. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fonts-kannada-2.1.5-3.fc8 How reproducible: 1. Every Time Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open gnome-character-map. 2. Select U0C9D followed by U0CCA followed by U0C9D followed by U0CCB. Actual results: As shown in the attached image Expected results: As shown by the following steps: 1. Install http://kannadakasturi.com/font/brhknd.ttf. 2. Open http://kannadakasturi.com/includes/transliterate.asp. 3. Enter the combination JoJO. Additional info: 1. The fonts from http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=56358 also show the glyphs like kannadakasturi.com instead of like Lohit Kannada. 2. This is similar to earlier bugs: bug 231965 and bug 233257. Hence I assume Lohit Kannada is at fault and not the other fonts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 07:03:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 02:03:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjuct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070703.n0773Km8011740@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 --- Comment #1 from Padmanabhan V. K. 2009-01-07 02:03:19 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328351) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328351) Incorrect rendering of U0C9D U0CCA U0C9D U0CCB -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 09:16:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 04:16:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070916.n079Gxvq024949@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 04:16:58 EDT --- php-ZendFramework-1.7.2-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update php-ZendFramework'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-0094 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 09:23:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 04:23:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477479] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901070923.n079NTu9010636@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-07 04:23:27 EDT --- Those other pages that were approved yesterday by FPC (minutes not posted yet) may also be relevant for VLGothic http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_(2008-12-21) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2008-12-22) You probably want to perform the naming changes at the same time. To change a srpm naming, the current procedure is to orphan the old package in rawhide, and post a review request with the new name (I'll approve it as a matter of course if you do so) This will be discussed this evening by FESCO, you may want to add some input here http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/RenamingPackages As for the upgrade path, you have two choices: 1. If there is a clear mapping between the old packages and the new packages, use obsoletes inside the packages 2. If there is not use a compat package to garbage collect the old packages as has been done for dejavu in rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 12:00:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 07:00:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477375] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901071200.n07C0qBr014841@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477375 Roy Rankin changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 15:15:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:15:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477406] kdeedu: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901071515.n07FFcrx028293@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477406 Rex Dieter changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |478662 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 15:15:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:15:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901071515.n07FFbjP028240@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Rex Dieter changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rdieter at math.unl.edu Blocks| |477406 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From slankes at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 7 19:40:23 2009 From: slankes at fedoraproject.org (Sven Lankes) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:40:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/devel dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090107194023.6F77070100@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: slankes Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv772 Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec Log Message: initial import --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Dustismo Dustismo sans-serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf --- serif Dustismo Dustismo serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec --- %define fontname dustin-dustismo %define fontconf 63-%{fontname} %define common_desc General purpose fonts by Dustin Norlander available in \ serif and sans-serif versions. The fonts cover all European Latin characters. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 20030318 Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: General purpose sans-serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://www.dustismo.com # Actual download URL #URL: http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/t/ttf-dustin/ttf-dustin_20030517.orig.tar.gz Source0: Dustismo.zip Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf Source2: %{name}-roman-fontconfig.conf BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel %description %common_desc %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf}.conf dustismo_bold_italic.ttf dustismo_bold.ttf dustismo_italic.ttf Dustismo.ttf %package common Summary: Common files for %{name} Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description common %common_desc This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. %package roman Summary: General purpose serif font Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description roman %common_desc General purpose serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations %_font_pkg -n roman -f %{fontconf}-roman.conf Dustismo_Roman_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic.ttf %prep %setup -q -c %{name} sed -i 's/\r//' license.txt %build %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}.conf install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-roman.conf for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf %{fontconf}-roman.conf ; do ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf done %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc license.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Wed Dec 07 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-2 - Change package-name to dustin-dustistmo-fonts * Sun Dec 04 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-1 - Use newer debian-source as source - Convert to -multi spec * Wed Dec 31 2008 Sven Lankes - 20030207-1 - Initial packaging Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 19:39:53 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +Dustismo.zip Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 7 Jan 2009 19:39:53 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +de74f82082b7dba21e457b8bb32b88a5 Dustismo.zip From slankes at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 7 19:56:40 2009 From: slankes at fedoraproject.org (Sven Lankes) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10 dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 Message-ID: <20090107195640.B593770100@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: slankes Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2891/F-10 Added Files: dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec Log Message: initial import --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Dustismo Dustismo sans-serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf --- serif Dustismo Dustismo serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec --- %define fontname dustin-dustismo %define fontconf 63-%{fontname} %define common_desc General purpose fonts by Dustin Norlander available in \ serif and sans-serif versions. The fonts cover all European Latin characters. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 20030318 Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: General purpose sans-serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://www.dustismo.com # Actual download URL #URL: http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/t/ttf-dustin/ttf-dustin_20030517.orig.tar.gz Source0: Dustismo.zip Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf Source2: %{name}-roman-fontconfig.conf BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel %description %common_desc %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf}.conf dustismo_bold_italic.ttf dustismo_bold.ttf dustismo_italic.ttf Dustismo.ttf %package common Summary: Common files for %{name} Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description common %common_desc This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. %package roman Summary: General purpose serif font Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description roman %common_desc General purpose serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations %_font_pkg -n roman -f %{fontconf}-roman.conf Dustismo_Roman_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic.ttf %prep %setup -q -c %{name} sed -i 's/\r//' license.txt %build %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}.conf install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-roman.conf for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf %{fontconf}-roman.conf ; do ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf done %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc license.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Wed Dec 07 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-2 - Change package-name to dustin-dustistmo-fonts * Sun Dec 04 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-1 - Use newer debian-source as source - Convert to -multi spec * Wed Dec 31 2008 Sven Lankes - 20030207-1 - Initial packaging From slankes at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 7 19:56:40 2009 From: slankes at fedoraproject.org (Sven Lankes) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9 dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 Message-ID: <20090107195640.F190570100@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: slankes Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2891/F-9 Added Files: dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec Log Message: initial import --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Dustismo Dustismo sans-serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts-roman-fontconfig.conf --- serif Dustismo Dustismo serif --- NEW FILE dustin-dustismo-fonts.spec --- %define fontname dustin-dustismo %define fontconf 63-%{fontname} %define common_desc General purpose fonts by Dustin Norlander available in \ serif and sans-serif versions. The fonts cover all European Latin characters. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 20030318 Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: General purpose sans-serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://www.dustismo.com # Actual download URL #URL: http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/t/ttf-dustin/ttf-dustin_20030517.orig.tar.gz Source0: Dustismo.zip Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf Source2: %{name}-roman-fontconfig.conf BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel %description %common_desc %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf}.conf dustismo_bold_italic.ttf dustismo_bold.ttf dustismo_italic.ttf Dustismo.ttf %package common Summary: Common files for %{name} Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description common %common_desc This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. %package roman Summary: General purpose serif font Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description roman %common_desc General purpose serif font with bold, italic and bold-italic variations %_font_pkg -n roman -f %{fontconf}-roman.conf Dustismo_Roman_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic_Bold.ttf Dustismo_Roman_Italic.ttf %prep %setup -q -c %{name} sed -i 's/\r//' license.txt %build %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}.conf install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-roman.conf for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf %{fontconf}-roman.conf ; do ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf done %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc license.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Wed Dec 07 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-2 - Change package-name to dustin-dustistmo-fonts * Sun Dec 04 2009 Sven Lankes - 20030318-1 - Use newer debian-source as source - Convert to -multi spec * Wed Dec 31 2008 Sven Lankes - 20030207-1 - Initial packaging From slankes at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 7 20:02:07 2009 From: slankes at fedoraproject.org (Sven Lankes) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 20:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10 .cvsignore,1.1,1.2 sources,1.1,1.2 Message-ID: <20090107200207.7A98A70100@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: slankes Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3724/F-10 Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Log Message: add the source file for the release branches Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 20:01:37 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +Dustismo.zip Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-10/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 7 Jan 2009 20:01:37 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +de74f82082b7dba21e457b8bb32b88a5 Dustismo.zip From slankes at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 7 20:02:07 2009 From: slankes at fedoraproject.org (Sven Lankes) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 20:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9 .cvsignore,1.1,1.2 sources,1.1,1.2 Message-ID: <20090107200207.CA72270100@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: slankes Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3724/F-9 Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Log Message: add the source file for the release branches Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 7 Jan 2009 20:01:37 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +Dustismo.zip Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/dustin-dustismo-fonts/F-9/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 7 Jan 2009 00:04:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 7 Jan 2009 20:01:37 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +de74f82082b7dba21e457b8bb32b88a5 Dustismo.zip From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 20:10:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:10:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901072010.n07KAjnu011714@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 15:10:45 EDT --- dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 20:09:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:09:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901072009.n07K9tUo011305@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 15:09:54 EDT --- dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 7 23:09:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:09:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901072309.n07N9QUa012325@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-07 18:09:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > ./lang/sm_utf8/fonts/default.ttf > > ./lang/to_utf8/fonts/default.ttf > > Arial Narrow, not OK. I can modify the source to strip this out, and then > > symlink to something, what would be a good replacement? > > I'll then notify upstream. > > No idea, maybe ask Jens Petersen? In fact Tongan and Samoan are already 100% covered by Dejavu (all families), so this is not only illegal, but totally unecesary -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 04:16:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:16:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080416.n084Go1K032111@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 23:16:50 EDT --- dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update dustin-dustismo-fonts'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-0309 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 04:19:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:19:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478662] Review Request: dustin-dustismo-fonts - font with serif and sans-serif versions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080419.n084J22x032722@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478662 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 23:19:01 EDT --- dustin-dustismo-fonts-20030318-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update dustin-dustismo-fonts'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-0322 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 04:35:31 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:35:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080435.n084ZVjk003185@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Padmanabhan V. K. changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|[kn_IN] Conjuct combination |[kn_IN] Conjunct |of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB |combination of U0C9D with |is rendering wrongly |U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering | |wrongly --- Comment #2 from Padmanabhan V. K. 2009-01-07 23:35:31 EDT --- Using the program from http://gfontview.sourceforge.net/ it is seen that there already are glyphs in the font named U0C9D_U0CCA.pstf and U0C9D_U0CCB.pstf which show the correct conjuncts. Only the mappings between the character combinations and the glyphs to be displayed need to be added/corrected. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 04:51:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:51:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 428427] [kn_IN][fonts-indic] - 0CB5+0CCA is wrongly rendering In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080451.n084pEOZ020110@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428427 --- Comment #6 from Padmanabhan V. K. 2009-01-07 23:51:13 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328437) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328437) Incorrect rendering of U0CAA U0CCA U0CAB U0CCA Wrong Conjuct combinations are formed for U0CAA+U0CCA, U0CAB+U0CCA, U0CAA+U0CCB, and U0CAB+U0CCB as well. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): fonts-kannada-2.1.5-3.fc8 How reproducible: 1. Every Time Steps to Reproduce: 1. Open gnome-character-map. 2. Select U0CAA followed by U0CCA followed by U0CAB followed by U0CCA. Actual results: As shown in the attached image Expected results: As shown by the following steps: 1. Install http://kannadakasturi.com/font/brhknd.ttf. 2. Open http://kannadakasturi.com/includes/transliterate.asp. 3. Enter the combination poPo. Additional info: 1. The fonts from http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=56358 also show the glyphs like kannadakasturi.com instead of like Lohit Kannada. 2. This is similar to the earlier issue reported here. 3. Using the program from http://gfontview.sourceforge.net/ it is seen that there already are glyphs in the font named U0CAC_U0CCA.pstf [can be renamed to the more appropriate U0CAA_U0CCA.pstf?] and U0CAB_U0CC3.abvs_U0CC0.psts [can be renamed to U0CAB_U0CCA.pstf?] which show the conjuncts like kannadakasturi.com. Only the mappings between the character combinations and the glyphs to be displayed seem to be incorrect. Hence I assume Lohit Kannada is at fault and not the other fonts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 8 07:01:14 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 07:01:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.28,1.29 Message-ID: <20090108070114.CD6AB700FD@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21724 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: repatched rev 11 Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.28 retrieving revision 1.29 diff -u -r1.28 -r1.29 --- cjkunifonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 02:24:34 -0000 1.28 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 8 Jan 2009 07:00:44 -0000 1.29 @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made \available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended \ by the CJK Unifonts project. +%define umingbuilddir ../%{name}-uming-%{version} +%define ukaibuilddir ../%{name}-ukai-%{version} %define umingfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-uming %define ukaifontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-ukai %define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d @@ -12,7 +14,7 @@ Name: %{fontname} Version: 0.2.20080216.1 -Release: 11.2%{?dist} +Release: 12%{?dist} Summary: Chinese TrueType Fonts -- Simplified and Traditional Chinese Ming and Kai Face License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X @@ -95,23 +97,23 @@ install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} -cd %{name}-uming-%{version} +cd %{umingbuilddir} for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf + cd %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/ && \ + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf $fconf && \ + cd - done -cd .. - -cd %{name}-ukai-%{version} +cd %{ukaibuilddir} for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - ln -s %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf + cd %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/ && \ + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf $fconf && \ + cd - done -cd .. +cd - # backward compat install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType @@ -176,14 +178,15 @@ %dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW %dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType %dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType -%{umingfontdir}/*.ttc -%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN +%{umingfontdir}/*.ttc +%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_fontconfig_confdir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{umingfontdir}/fonts.dir %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{umingfontdir}/fonts.scale %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf @@ -203,20 +206,21 @@ %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/README %doc %{ukaibuilddir}/TODO %dir %{ukaifontdir} -%{ukaifontdir}/*.ttc -%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN %{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW %{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN +%{ukaifontdir}/*.ttc +%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_fontconfig_confdir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{ukaifontdir}/fonts.dir %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{ukaifontdir}/fonts.scale %{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai %changelog -* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-11.2.fc11 +* Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-12.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) * Sun Dec 7 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 0.2.20080216.1-10.fc11 From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 07:22:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 02:22:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080722.n087MnYm029436@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477373, which changed state. Bug 477373 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 07:22:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 02:22:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080722.n087MmQg029404@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-08 02:22:47 EDT --- built http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=77668 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 07:36:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 02:36:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901080736.n087ae6X031710@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 09:03:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 04:03:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479238] New: please update to latest release (20090104) Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: please update to latest release (20090104) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479238 Summary: please update to latest release (20090104) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: freefont AssignedTo: orion at cora.nwra.com ReportedBy: petersen at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: orion at cora.nwra.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Description of problem: A new release was made recently (the second since the last update by spot): could you please update the package to the latest upstream version? Actual results: freefont-20080323 Expected results: http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/freefont/freefont-ttf-20090104.tar.gz Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 15:39:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:39:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901081539.n08FdjKM006214@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-08 10:39:44 EDT --- Ok, I'll check out the khmeros-fonts packaging, and use freefont. WRT ArialNarrow->Dejavu, how do I know which font file to use? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 19:39:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:39:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901081939.n08JdiaZ014930@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #13 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-08 14:39:42 EDT --- Just drop all fonts in the tongan and samoan packages, and use dejavu sans as the default app font -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 22:22:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:22:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477408] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901082222.n08MMpDx016775@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477408 Jon Ciesla changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |477427 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 22:22:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:22:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901082222.n08MMoWA016758@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 Jon Ciesla changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |477408 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-08 17:22:49 EDT --- Waiting on 477408 for khmeros-fonts. I'll work on the rest in the mean time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 23:00:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 18:00:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-sfd-fonts - Old Standard Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901082300.n08N0CXU023954@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 --- Comment #28 from Martin-Gomez Pablo 2009-01-08 18:00:09 EDT --- Ok, for me, the spec file is now ok. Just about the fontconf, change the "sans-serif" to "serif". I will test the building this week-end. I will surely approved this package on Sunday. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 9 00:06:10 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec,1.5,1.6 Message-ID: <20090109000610.613A47013F@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19293 Modified Files: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec Log Message: revolves: rhbz#477332 (convert to new font packaging guidelines) Index: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel/baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 30 Jun 2008 06:11:03 -0000 1.5 +++ baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 9 Jan 2009 00:05:40 -0000 1.6 @@ -1,4 +1,8 @@ -%define fontname baekmuk-ttf +%define fontname baekmuk-ttf +%define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} +%define archivename %{name}-%{version} +%define common_desc \ +This package provides the free Korean TrueType fonts. %define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} %define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d @@ -6,7 +10,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 2.2 -Release: 9%{?dist} +Release: 10%{?dist} Summary: Free Korean TrueType fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -15,21 +19,26 @@ Source0: http://kldp.net/frs/download.php/1429/%{fontname}-%{version}.tar.gz Source1: FAPIcidfmap.ko Source2: cidfmap.ko + Obsoletes: fonts-korean + +BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) -BuildRequires: xorg-x11-font-utils, ttmkfdir >= 3.0.6 +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel, xorg-x11-font-utils, ttmkfdir >= 3.0.6 %description -This package provides the free Korean TrueType fonts. +%common_desc %package common Summary: Common files for Korean Baekmuk TrueType fonts License: Baekmuk Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem Conflicts: fonts-korean < 2.2-5 %description common +%common_desc + This package contains some common files for Baekmuk Korean TrueType fonts. %define mk_pkg()\ @@ -38,9 +47,11 @@ License: Baekmuk\ Group: User Interface/X\ Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6\ -Requires: %{name}-common\ +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common\ \ %description %1\ +%common_desc\ +\ This package contains the Korean TrueType font %2 typeface.\ \ %post %1\ @@ -75,35 +86,38 @@ %{nil} %install -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -rf %{buildroot} # for catalogue -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue} +install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} for i in batang dotum gulim hline; do - install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir}-$i - install -p -m 0644 ttf/$i.ttf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir}-$i - ln -sf ../../..%{fontdir}-$i $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue}/%{name}-$i - %{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir}-$i -o $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir}-$i/fonts.scale - mkfontdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir}-$i + install -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i + install -p -m 0644 ttf/$i.ttf %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i + ln -sf ../../..%{fontdir}-$i %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-$i + %{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i -o %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i/fonts.scale + mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i done # for ghostscript -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir} -install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE1} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ -install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE2} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{cidmapdir}/ +install -d %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir} +install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ # convert Korean copyright file to utf8 iconv -f EUC-KR -t UTF-8 COPYRIGHT.ks > COPYRIGHT.ko %clean -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -rf %{buildroot} %files common %doc COPYRIGHT COPYRIGHT.ko README %{cidmapdir}/ %changelog +* Fri Jan 09 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-10.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Convert to new font packaging guidelines.) + * Mon Jun 30 2008 Caius Chance - 2.2-9.fc10 - Refine obsoletes tag version-release specific. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 00:15:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 19:15:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090015.n090F0HC019592@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477332, which changed state. Bug 477332 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 00:14:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 19:14:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090014.n090ExYN019559@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |i18n Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #1 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-08 19:14:58 EDT --- built http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=77782 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 9 03:15:26 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 03:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/liberation-fonts/devel liberation-fonts.spec,1.25,1.26 Message-ID: <20090109031527.2A4CC7011C@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4039 Modified Files: liberation-fonts.spec Log Message: * Resolves: rhbz#477410 (convert into new font packaging guidelines) Index: liberation-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel/liberation-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.25 retrieving revision 1.26 diff -u -r1.25 -r1.26 --- liberation-fonts.spec 9 Dec 2008 06:31:21 -0000 1.25 +++ liberation-fonts.spec 9 Jan 2009 03:14:54 -0000 1.26 @@ -1,28 +1,65 @@ -%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/liberation +%define fontname liberation +%define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} +%define archivename %{name}-%{version} +%define common_desc \ +The Liberation Fonts are intended to be replacements for the three most \ +commonly used fonts on Microsoft systems: Times New Roman, Arial, and Courier \ +New. + +%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} %define catalogue %{_sysconfdir}/X11/fontpath.d -Summary: Fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Windows Fonts -Name: liberation-fonts -Version: 1.04.93 -Release: 2%{?dist} -# The license of the Liberation Fonts is a EULA that contains -# GPLv2 and two exceptions: +Name: %{fontname}-fonts +Summary: Fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft Windows fonts +Version: 1.04.93 +Release: 3%{?dist} +# The license of the Liberation Fonts is a EULA that contains GPLv2 and two +# exceptions: # The first exception is the standard FSF font exception. -# The second exception is an anti-lockdown clause somewhat like -# the one in GPLv3. This license is Free, but GPLv2 and GPLv3 -# incompatible. -License: Liberation -Group: User Interface/X -URL: https://www.redhat.com/promo/fonts/ -Source0: liberation-fonts-1.04.93.devel.tar.gz -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root -BuildArch: noarch -Buildrequires: xorg-x11-font-utils +# The second exception is an anti-lockdown clause somewhat like the one in +# GPLv3. This license is Free, but GPLv2 and GPLv3 incompatible. +License: Liberation +Group: User Interface/X +URL: https://www.redhat.com/promo/fonts/ +Source0: liberation-fonts-1.04.93.devel.tar.gz +BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) +BuildArch: noarch +Buildrequires: fontpackages-devel xorg-x11-font-utils %description -The Liberation Fonts are intended to be replacements for the three -most commonly used fonts on Microsoft systems: Times New Roman, -Arial, and Courier New. +%common_desc + +%package common +Summary: Shared common files of Liberation font families. +License: Liberation +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem + +%description common +%common_desc + +Shared common files of Liberation font families. + +%define mk_pkg()\ +%package %1\ +Summary: %3 fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft %4\ +License: Liberation\ +Group: User Interface/X\ +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common\ +\ +%description %1\ +%common_desc\ +\ +%3 TrueType fonts that replaced commonly used Microsoft %4.\ +\ +%files %1\ +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755)\ +%dir %{fontdir}\ +%{fontdir}/Liberation%2-*.ttf + +%mk_pkg sans Sans Sans Arial +%mk_pkg serif Serif Sans-serif Times_New_Roman +%mk_pkg mono Mono Monospace Courier_New %prep %setup -q -n %{name}-%{version}.devel @@ -31,6 +68,7 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} %build +%{nil} %install rm -rf %{buildroot} @@ -40,8 +78,8 @@ # configuration install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d # catalogue -install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue} -ln -sf %{fontdir} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue}/%{name} +install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +ln -sf %{fontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name} # generate fonts.dir and fonts.scale mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{fontdir} @@ -59,16 +97,17 @@ fi fi -%files -%defattr(-,root,root) -%doc License.txt COPYING -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/*.ttf +%files common +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) +%doc AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING License.txt README %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale %{catalogue}/%{name} %changelog +* Fri Jan 09 2009 Caius Chance - 1.04.93-3.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477410 (Convert to new font packaging guidelines.) + * Tue Dec 09 2008 Caius Chance - 1.04.93-2.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#474522 (Cent sign is not coressed in Sans & Mono.) From cchance at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 9 03:32:05 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 03:32:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/liberation-fonts/devel liberation-fonts.spec,1.26,1.27 Message-ID: <20090109033205.3E1087011C@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv5299 Modified Files: liberation-fonts.spec Log Message: * resolves: rhbz#477410 (added meta package and refined rependencies) Index: liberation-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/liberation-fonts/devel/liberation-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.26 retrieving revision 1.27 diff -u -r1.26 -r1.27 --- liberation-fonts.spec 9 Jan 2009 03:14:54 -0000 1.26 +++ liberation-fonts.spec 9 Jan 2009 03:31:34 -0000 1.27 @@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ Group: User Interface/X URL: https://www.redhat.com/promo/fonts/ Source0: liberation-fonts-1.04.93.devel.tar.gz + +Requires: liberation-fonts-sans >= %{version} +Requires: liberation-fonts-serif >= %{version} +Requires: liberation-fonts-mono >= %{version} BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch Buildrequires: fontpackages-devel xorg-x11-font-utils @@ -29,6 +33,9 @@ %description %common_desc +Meta-package of Liberation fonts which installs Sans, Serif, and Monospace +families. + %package common Summary: Shared common files of Liberation font families. License: Liberation @@ -45,7 +52,7 @@ Summary: %3 fonts to replace commonly used Microsoft %4\ License: Liberation\ Group: User Interface/X\ -Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common\ +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common >= %{version}\ \ %description %1\ %common_desc\ @@ -97,6 +104,9 @@ fi fi +%files +%{nil} + %files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING License.txt README From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 04:04:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:04:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090404.n0944Q04012170@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477410, which changed state. Bug 477410 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 04:04:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:04:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090404.n0944Qft012145@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #2 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-08 23:04:25 EDT --- built http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=77796 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 05:35:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:35:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479371] Broken hinting on "u" in Liberation Mono Bold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090535.n095Zf4S009399@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 --- Comment #1 from Cody Boisclair 2009-01-09 00:35:40 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328518) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328518) Liberation Mono Bold 1.04.93 with antialiasing off -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 05:34:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:34:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479371] New: Broken hinting on "u" in Liberation Mono Bold Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Broken hinting on "u" in Liberation Mono Bold https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Summary: Broken hinting on "u" in Liberation Mono Bold Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: liberation-fonts AssignedTo: cchance at redhat.com ReportedBy: cody at zone38.net QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: cchance at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Created an attachment (id=328517) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328517) Liberation Mono 1.04.93 with antialiasing on Description of problem: Though the hinting has been fixed in Sans Bold as of version 1.04.92, the letter "u" still has incorrect hinting in Mono Bold, an error that's quite noticeable in certain sizes on any system with bytecode hinting enabled. I'm attaching a screenshot from Ubuntu to demonstrate; of particular note are 9 point (the second line) and 12 point (the 5th line). Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 1.04.93 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 05:35:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 00:35:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479371] Broken hinting on "u" in Liberation Mono Bold In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090535.n095ZDlO021064@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479371 Cody Boisclair changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #328517|Liberation Mono 1.04.93 |Liberation Mono Bold description|with antialiasing on |1.04.93 with antialiasing | |on -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:02:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:02:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474522] Incorrect cent sign glyph (U+00A2) in Sans and Mono style in Liberation fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090602.n0962D6k030516@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474522 Cody Boisclair changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cody at zone38.net --- Comment #8 from Cody Boisclair 2009-01-09 01:02:12 EDT --- The hinting has not been adjusted for the new design of the ? sign - see attachment 328522 which I just posted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:01:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:01:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474522] Incorrect cent sign glyph (U+00A2) in Sans and Mono style in Liberation fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090601.n0961fJu019506@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474522 --- Comment #7 from Cody Boisclair 2009-01-09 01:01:39 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328522) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328522) Display of cent sign in Sans and Mono with bytecode hinting Hinting for ? is completely broken-- particularly in Mono. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:05:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:05:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474522] Incorrect cent sign glyph (U+00A2) in Sans and Mono style in Liberation fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090605.n0965HCR020869@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474522 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:03:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:03:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 434647] X server segfaults in libXfont fs_cleanup_bfont() In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090603.n0963LN8031074@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434647 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #4 from Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 01:03:20 EDT --- Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:35:39 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:35:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 450980] Unable to install pango-devel for i386 and x86_64 at the same time In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090635.n096ZdpX009299@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450980 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 01:35:38 EDT --- Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 06:50:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 01:50:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090650.n096oscG014377@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 01:50:53 EDT --- Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 07:21:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 02:21:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 360901] Smaller fonts in X in F8T3 after login In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090721.n097Lpi1023648@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=360901 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #13 from Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 02:21:50 EDT --- Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 07:42:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 02:42:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 436610] 'yum remove glibc.ppc64' wants to remove ppc32 packages. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901090742.n097gOhM022087@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436610 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #12 from Bug Zapper 2009-01-09 02:42:23 EDT --- Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 08:50:31 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 03:50:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479386] New: Pango multilib conflict on F10 Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Pango multilib conflict on F10 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479386 Summary: Pango multilib conflict on F10 Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: pango AssignedTo: besfahbo at redhat.com ReportedBy: stransky at redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Description of problem: Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package pango-devel.i386 0:1.22.3-1.fc10 set to be updated ---> Package pango.i386 0:1.22.3-1.fc10 set to be updated --> Finished Dependency Resolution Dependencies Resolved ============================================================================================================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================================================================================== Updating: pango i386 1.22.3-1.fc10 updates 375 k pango-devel i386 1.22.3-1.fc10 updates 327 k Transaction Summary ============================================================================================================================== Install 0 Package(s) Update 2 Package(s) Remove 0 Package(s) Total size: 701 k Is this ok [y/N]: y Downloading Packages: ===================================================== Entering rpm code ====================================================== Running rpm_check_debug Running Transaction Test Finished Transaction Test Transaction Check Error: file /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/pango/PangoMarkupFormat.html from install of pango-devel-1.22.3-1.fc10.i386 conflicts with file from package pango-devel-1.22.3-1.fc10.x86_64 file /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/pango/pango-querymodules.html from install of pango-devel-1.22.3-1.fc10.i386 conflicts with file from package pango-devel-1.22.3-1.fc10.x86_64 Error Summary ------------- Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. yum install pango.i386 on x86_64 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 13:25:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:25:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091325.n09DPBZB005601@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477488, which changed state. Bug 477488 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477488 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 13:25:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:25:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477488] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091325.n09DPAQH005571@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477488 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 08:25:09 EDT --- [Some optional QA comments] Unless you have a very specific font style need, please consider linking from one of the DejaVu packages as most fedora systems will already have them installed so xplanet won't require the download of a new font package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 13:42:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:42:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091342.n09DgoNY009810@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477478, which changed state. Bug 477478 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 13:42:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:42:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477478] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091342.n09DgnPq009785@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 08:42:48 EDT --- Two QA remarks: 1. Even though the same default font set is likely to be installed in all Fedora system it's not 100% guaranteed. Fontconfig apps can manage very well as long as there is one font on the system so we don't peg specific ones via deps in that case. OTOH, you absolutely need the exact target of your symlinks to be present or I suppose bad things will happen. So I advice to actually require the packages providing the font files you've symlinked in your app. 2. While the LGC variants of dejavu are smaller, we install the full versions by default. So if you depend on the full versions, your app won't consume resources not already available on most systems. And if you depend on the LGC versions, you'll force the download of additional material. Therefore linking the full version instead of the LGC one will be a space win in the majority of cases -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:04:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:04:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477409] koffice: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091404.n09E4JkK016096@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477409 Steven M. Parrish changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #2 from Steven M. Parrish 2009-01-09 09:04:18 EDT --- Is someone working on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:10:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:10:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091410.n09EAM1c008807@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477332, which changed state. Bug 477332 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:10:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:10:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091410.n09EALFx008770@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 09:10:19 EDT --- Please use the %_font_pkg macro; its an integral part of the official font packaging guidelines. That will require you to perform the mkfontdir stuff manually and probably put the fonts.scale files in a separate subpackage. Given all the problems we have with core X fonts doing this or even dropping fonts.scale altogether for this package is not necessarily a bad thing -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:16:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:16:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477409] koffice: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091416.n09EGQFd010070@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477409 Rex Dieter changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |446451 Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter 2009-01-09 09:16:25 EDT --- I plan to, for F-11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:20:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091420.n09EKo4P011100@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477373, which changed state. Bug 477373 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:20:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:20:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091420.n09EKmJF011066@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 09:20:47 EDT --- Please use the %_font_pkg macro; its an integral part of the official font packaging guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:33:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:33:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091433.n09EXaPm013778@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 09:33:35 EDT --- Seems Debian did the same a few years ago, so there may be some useful info here http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-devel at lists.debian.org/msg210482.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:48:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:48:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091448.n09Em08J017263@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477385, which changed state. Bug 477385 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:47:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:47:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477385] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091447.n09ElwCo017206@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 09:47:57 EDT --- BTW unless your app has very specific style or metric needs it's much better to replace FreeSans Bold with symlinks to DejaVu since this one is more likely to be already installed on system (and thus you'll avoid a new font download) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 14:56:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:56:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477385] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091456.n09EuQj5019299@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 --- Comment #4 from Matthias Saou 2009-01-09 09:56:25 EDT --- Well, using that particular font is upstream's choice. Why should I override it? Are those two fonts identical? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:01:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:01:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091501.n09F16si029427@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477391, which changed state. Bug 477391 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:01:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477391] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091501.n09F147t029373@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 10:01:03 EDT --- Please consider symlinking to dejavu instead as it's essentially an update and extension of the dejavu fonts and besides is likely to be already available on system so a dejavu dep will usually not result in a new download -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:10:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:10:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477385] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091510.n09FAsXK032014@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 10:10:53 EDT --- They are not ? they have slightly different style, metrics and very different coverage. But since they are both in the "general-purpose font" category most projects that use FreeSans do not care if it's replaced by dejavu or not. (and dejavu is better quality, has more coverage, and is part of our default installs, etc). However this is definitely something worth discussing with upstream before doing the change. (would also be a good time to suggest them to use fontconfig so you don't have to be in the font management business at all; if they use one of the higher level text libs such as pango or pangocairo they'll also win support for more scripts than just latin) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:31:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:31:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477399] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091531.n09FVqQ7027911@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477399 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 10:31:51 EDT --- Note that artbrush is likely to be a free font, but tracking the original author and making sure of it requires someone with lots of persistence and time The web finds the following attribution Gary D. Jessey RR 1, Box 107 Jenkins, Kentucky 41537 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:47:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:47:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091547.n09FlCr3008221@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477414, which changed state. Bug 477414 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477414 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:42:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:42:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091542.n09Fgucw006993@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477410, which changed state. Bug 477410 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:47:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:47:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477414] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091547.n09FlBbU008196@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477414 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 10:47:09 EDT --- Please consider symlinking to the dejavu full packages are they are effectively a modern vera extension and update and will already be installed on most systems (so your package won't pull in a new font package in that case) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 15:42:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:42:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091542.n09FgtY0006968@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 10:42:54 EDT --- Please use the %_font_pkg macro; its an integral part of the official font packaging guidelines. Behdad requested an end to all the variations around fontconfig caching, so he does not have to check every font package for fontconfig breakage. The %_font_pkg macro puts all this stuff in a single package he can easily audit -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:02:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:02:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091602.n09G2LQD012026@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477416, which changed state. Bug 477416 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:02:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:02:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091602.n09G2KxY012002@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 11:02:18 EDT --- There are quite a lot of fonts in there and it's not sufficient to split them in a fonts subpackage, this subpackage also needs to conform to Fedora guidelines The decision tree is the following: for each font family in lilipond: 1. check with upstream if this font was created or modified by lilypond a. if it's just a copy of someone else's font, check if this font is available in Fedora i. if yes, add a dep on the existing fedora package (for example the urw fonts) ii. if no, get the original font source packaged separately b. if the font was created or modified by lilypond, create a separate subpackage for it (that installs it in correct font directories, using the official fedora rpm font macros) 2. symlink in the main lilypond package the font files installed in /usr/share/fonts provided by those packages of subpackages 3. add all the new font packages or subpackages to the fonts comps group -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:13:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:13:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091613.n09GDSXP014724@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477422, which changed state. Bug 477422 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:15:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:15:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091615.n09GFa1e015348@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477428, which changed state. Bug 477428 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:15:35 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:15:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477428] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091615.n09GFZCs015323@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 11:15:34 EDT --- (reopening so the dejavu vs vera bit is not lost) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:13:27 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:13:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477422] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091613.n09GDR34014695@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 11:13:26 EDT --- Please consider symlinking to the dejavu full packages are they are effectively a modern vera extension and update and will already be installed on most systems (so your package won't pull in a new font package in that case) Also do check the package names you use in deps are available in fedora-devel ; there has been quite a lot of restructuring fonts-wise here -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:23:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:23:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091623.n09GNNGG017362@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477432, which changed state. Bug 477432 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:23:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:23:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477432] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091623.n09GNMX6017337@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 11:23:21 EDT --- Please consider symlinking to the correct dejavu full package as dejavu is effectively a modern vera extension and update and will already be installed on most systems (so your package won't pull in a new font package in that case) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:28:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:28:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091628.n09GSBEf018670@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477434, which changed state. Bug 477434 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 16:28:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:28:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091628.n09GSAuu018633@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 11:28:09 EDT --- Please consider linking to dejavu full and not lgc as full is installed on most Fedora systems while LGC is not -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nmailhot at openoffice.org Fri Jan 9 16:54:31 2009 From: nmailhot at openoffice.org (nmailhot at openoffice.org) Date: 9 Jan 2009 16:54:31 -0000 Subject: [Issue 97885] Font and Font size show disharmony in Calc After chinese translation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090109165431.10931.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=97885 User nmailhot changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'pj' |'fedorafonts,pj' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:03:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:03:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477391] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091703.n09H30bj026020@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-09 12:02:59 EDT --- Do you mean dejavu is an update of bitstream vera? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:19:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:19:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477478] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091719.n09HJUA1019579@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 --- Comment #4 from Ville Skytt? 2009-01-09 12:19:29 EDT --- 1) vdr-skins already has dependencies to the symlink target providing dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans and dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans-mono packages. Did I miss something? Ideally I'd actually like to depend on the exact symlinked filenames (they have moved at least 3 times during the last 18 or so months which is not fun at all) but that would cause download of yum filelists which is very much frowned upon. So I'll keep the package name dependencies (and have a build time %check test which unfortunately does not help after build), hoping that the font filenames are no longer moved around. 2) Thanks for the info - in Aug 2007, dejavu-lgc had become more ubiquitous than vera and full dejavu which is why I changed to it. Will take a look at switching to full dejavu. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:20:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477391] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091720.n09HKjlx030064@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 12:20:44 EDT --- dejavu is a fork of vera with a huge number of glyphs added and many fixes to the original vera parts. Vera has essentially fossilized when the contract Bitstream head with the GNOME foundation expired -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:18:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:18:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091718.n09HIXEU029490@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-09 12:18:32 EDT --- Looking at the pre-build tarball, it appears that the build process constructs the fonts at that time. This would lead to 1b above. Do I need to move the fonts from /usr/share/lilypond-%{version}/fonts to /usr/share/fonts/lilypond and symlink? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:24:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:24:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477391] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091724.n09HOSQM020743@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-09 12:24:27 EDT --- So it's not technically dead, just gradually being deprecated. I'll move to dejavu. Thanks for the information. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:34:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:34:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477478] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091734.n09HYkG7032504@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 12:34:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > 1) vdr-skins already has dependencies to the symlink target providing > dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans and dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans-mono packages. Did I miss > something? I'm the one who messed up, too many font spec reviews today, I'm starting to see double :( > hoping that the font filenames > are no longer moved around. I though they moved twice, once because of a guideline change on our part and once because upstream changed. But that was for dejavu full, lgc may have had a more bumpy history as it's less critical. We do try to avoid renammings, but sometimes they happen. Fontconfig apps don't care :) > 2) Thanks for the info - in Aug 2007, dejavu-lgc had become more ubiquitous > than vera and full dejavu which is why I changed to it. Will take a look at > switching to full dejavu. We first used dejavu LGC as default in F6 then switched to DejaVu full for F9 when Behdad felt comfortable enough about it. Nowadays DejaVu LGC like Bitstream Vera is pretty much an historical package I don't like to see deps on. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:39:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:39:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091739.n09HdpJW023556@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 12:39:50 EDT --- You need to package each set of OTF font files that corresponds to a font family using the %_font_pkg macro. That will pretty much force guidelines compliance on you. I'm pretty sure at least the Century Schoolbook bit is an URW font which is already packaged many times in Fedora, and I'd be surprised the lilipond people had changed it. You probably need to discuss it a bit with lilypond people upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 17:44:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:44:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091744.n09HilFU024660@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-09 12:44:46 EDT --- The INSTALL indicates that they have changed it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 18:26:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:26:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091826.n09IQpi1001193@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 13:26:51 EDT --- Then they should rename it at least :( -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 18:29:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:29:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477478] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091829.n09IT8gR001422@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 13:29:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > 1) vdr-skins already has dependencies to the symlink target providing > > dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans and dejavu-fonts-lgc-sans-mono packages. Did I miss > > something? > > I'm the one who messed up, too many font spec reviews today, I'm starting to > see double :( To clarify: as loog as you do not use fontconfig to discover font you do need to depend on the font files your app use (either via filename deps or via package deps, I don't care which one but others do) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 19:22:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:22:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477391] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091922.n09JMIgr014214@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 Jon Ciesla changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-09 14:22:17 EDT --- Switched to dejavu in rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 19:22:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:22:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901091922.n09JMJKf014239@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477391, which changed state. Bug 477391 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477391 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 21:53:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:53:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477432] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901092153.n09LrBrh017837@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 --- Comment #4 from Wart 2009-01-09 16:53:10 EDT --- Can you recommend the correct package and font file? When it comes to fonts, I don't know my sans from my serif. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 9 22:34:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:34:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477432] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901092234.n09MYm9s025722@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-09 17:34:47 EDT --- since you link vera sans bold right now the logical target would be dejavu sans bold -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 03:26:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477414] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901100326.n0A3QMtM010450@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477414 Jameson changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Jameson 2009-01-09 22:26:19 EDT --- Thanks for the suggestion. The version in rawhide is now linking to fonts from dejavu-fonts-sans and dejavu-fonts-sans-mono. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 03:26:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:26:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901100326.n0A3QNDc010487@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477414, which changed state. Bug 477414 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477414 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 11:06:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:06:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 435549] obsolete with ghostscript-8.62, for fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101106.n0AB6E7S030629@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435549 Bug Zapper changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|rawhide |10 Xose Vazquez Perez changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|10 |rawhide --- Comment #3 from Bug Zapper 2008-11-25 21:08:27 EDT --- This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 10 development cycle. Changing version to '10'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping --- Comment #4 from Xose Vazquez Perez 2009-01-10 06:06:13 EDT --- any news ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 13:03:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:03:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101303.n0AD3spQ021220@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477434, which changed state. Bug 477434 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 13:03:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:03:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101303.n0AD3roA021182@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 Hans de Goede changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Hans de Goede 2009-01-10 08:03:52 EDT --- Ogre also uses condensed fonts in several places which are only available in the LGC version, closing again. Note orge itself is not used much, and the demos (which require the fonts) are even less often installed. So this really is not much of an issue IMHO. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 13:54:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:54:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 459680] qt/kde: font antialiasing was disabled by uming fontconfig file. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101354.n0ADslni032623@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459680 Steven M. Parrish changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #45 from Steven M. Parrish 2009-01-10 08:54:43 EDT --- rdieter, kevin_kofler upstream, wontfix or cantfix? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 15:03:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 10:03:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 459680] qt/kde: font antialiasing was disabled by uming fontconfig file. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101503.n0AF3b2x015811@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459680 Rex Dieter changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #46 from Rex Dieter 2009-01-10 10:03:35 EDT --- shrug, upstream to trolltech would be the only sane way forward, imo. That would require someone who's experiencing this, and reproduce with a minimal test case. Any takers? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 16:14:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:14:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101614.n0AGEwnK031512@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477434, which changed state. Bug 477434 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 16:14:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:14:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101614.n0AGEvUT031465@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-10 11:14:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Ogre also uses condensed fonts in several places which are only available in > the LGC version, closing again. What a strange notion, of course condensed is available in dejavu-full just like in dejavu-lgc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 16:28:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:28:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101628.n0AGSQfs001727@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 --- Comment #6 from Hans de Goede 2009-01-10 11:28:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > Ogre also uses condensed fonts in several places which are only available in > > the LGC version, closing again. > > What a strange notion, of course condensed is available in dejavu-full just > like in dejavu-lgc [hans at localhost inf]$ ls /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/ DejaVuLGCSans-Bold.ttf DejaVuLGCSerif.ttf DejaVuLGCSans-BoldOblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSerifCondensed-Bold.ttf DejaVuLGCSans-ExtraLight.ttf DejaVuLGCSerifCondensed-BoldItalic.ttf DejaVuLGCSans-Oblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSerifCondensed-Italic.ttf DejaVuLGCSans.ttf DejaVuLGCSerifCondensed.ttf DejaVuLGCSansCondensed-Bold.ttf DejaVuSans-Bold.ttf DejaVuLGCSansCondensed-BoldOblique.ttf DejaVuSans-BoldOblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSansCondensed-Oblique.ttf DejaVuSans-Oblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSansCondensed.ttf DejaVuSans.ttf DejaVuLGCSansMono-Bold.ttf DejaVuSansMono-Bold.ttf DejaVuLGCSansMono-BoldOblique.ttf DejaVuSansMono-BoldOblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSansMono-Oblique.ttf DejaVuSansMono-Oblique.ttf DejaVuLGCSansMono.ttf DejaVuSansMono.ttf DejaVuLGCSerif-Bold.ttf DejaVuSerif-Bold.ttf DejaVuLGCSerif-BoldItalic.ttf DejaVuSerif.ttf DejaVuLGCSerif-Italic.ttf Note: This is F-10 so this may be fixed in rawhide, but I see no condensed versions of regular dejavu here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 16:29:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:29:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479521] New: Invalid character in ttf name table regarding copyright that crashes XML marshalling Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Invalid character in ttf name table regarding copyright that crashes XML marshalling https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479521 Summary: Invalid character in ttf name table regarding copyright that crashes XML marshalling Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: liberation-fonts AssignedTo: cchance at redhat.com ReportedBy: pander at users.sourceforge.net QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: cchance at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Description of problem: Invalid character in ttf name table regarding copyright that crashes XML marshalling Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): ttf-liberation 1.04~beta2-2 from Ubuntu 8.10 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. retrieve font nama table ttx -d . -t name /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-liberation/LiberationSans-Regular.ttf 2. in python, read the XML file via doc = libxml2.parseFile('LiberationSans-Regular.ttx') Actual results: LiberationSans-Regular.ttx:27: parser error : xmlParseCharRef: invalid xmlChar value 1 Liberation is a trademark of Red Ht, Inc. registered in U.S. Patent an ^ LiberationSans-Regular.ttx:69: parser error : xmlParseCharRef: invalid xmlChar value 1 Liberation is a trademark of Red Ht, Inc. registered in U.S. Patent an Expected results: Red Ht should be Red Hat, this is all right for the other TTF files in this package. Additional info: Please fix and push updated package downstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 16:53:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:53:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901101653.n0AGrgr2006485@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-10 11:53:42 EDT --- This is because you do not have the experimental dejavu subpackage installed. Since it has not been experimental for quite a long time, and people like you were confused by the package split, F11 has a new package layout $ rpm -ql dejavu-fonts-sans /etc/fonts/conf.d/20-unhint-small-dejavu-sans.conf /etc/fonts/conf.d/57-dejavu-sans.conf /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/20-unhint-small-dejavu-sans.conf /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/57-dejavu-sans.conf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-BoldOblique.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-ExtraLight.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Oblique.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-Bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-BoldOblique.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed-Oblique.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansCondensed.ttf LGC is built from the same sources as dejavu by removing stuff so it can't have material not present in full -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 20:58:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 15:58:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901102058.n0AKwOnJ021273@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477478, which changed state. Bug 477478 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 20:58:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 15:58:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477478] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901102058.n0AKwNfY021248@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477478 Ville Skytt? changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Fixed In Version|20081124-2 |20081124-3 Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #7 from Ville Skytt? 2009-01-10 15:58:22 EDT --- Changed to full dejavu in 20081124-3. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 21:51:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:51:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901102151.n0ALpXB1031988@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477434, which changed state. Bug 477434 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 21:51:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:51:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901102151.n0ALpW2n031952@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 Hans de Goede changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #8 from Hans de Goede 2009-01-10 16:51:31 EDT --- Ok, I changed it to use the full dejavu version now, closing again :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 10 22:07:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:07:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477434] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901102207.n0AM7XPd002379@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477434 --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-10 17:07:32 EDT --- Thanks a lot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Sun Jan 11 11:00:34 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 03:00:34 -0800 Subject: [Bug 378927] [meta] tracking bug for issues with pixel scaling at high dpis (resolutions) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111100.n0BB0Y0j019025@mrapp51.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378927 Natch changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |433664 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org Sun Jan 11 11:01:09 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org (bugzilla-daemon at mozilla.org) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 03:01:09 -0800 Subject: [Bug 378927] [meta] tracking bug for issues with pixel scaling at high dpis (resolutions) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111101.n0BB19wB023645@mrapp52.mozilla.org> Do not reply to this email. You can add comments to this bug at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378927 Natch changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|433664 | Depends on| |433664 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477392] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJSYY014382@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:27 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477413] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJlCJ014797@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477413 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:46 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477368] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJCEd014082@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477368 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:11 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477464] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKP5r016003@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477464 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:24 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477404] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJbEp014557@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477404 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:37 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:31 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477471] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKV05016115@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477471 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:30 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477394] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJUpN014415@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477394 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:29 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477472] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKWrv016138@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477472 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:31 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:27 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477390] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJR4H014362@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477390 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:26 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:39 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477480] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKdjs016293@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477480 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:39 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477487] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKiVE016372@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477487 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:43 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477382] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJLni014258@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477382 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:20 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477477] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKbiU016253@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477477 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:36 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477372] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJFPq014139@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477372 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:14 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJAxl014044@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:09 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477441] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK8kc015554@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477441 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:07 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:07 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477439] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK7Gw015535@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477439 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:06 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477450] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKH1H015822@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477450 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:17 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477483] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKgxe016337@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477483 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:41 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477335] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJ9Hv014022@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477335 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:08 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477424] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJurV015016@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477424 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:55 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJWsT014453@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:31 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477337] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJBXv014061@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477337 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:10 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477444] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKBUF015616@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477444 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:10 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477448] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKFoa015786@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477448 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:14 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477371] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJEZ6014118@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477371 --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:13 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477442] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK993015576@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477442 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:08 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477463] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKO6g015980@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477463 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:24 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477386] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJOUf014316@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477386 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:23 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJwG7015063@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:57 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477481] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKfwo016315@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477481 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:39 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477375] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJJPp014222@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477375 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:18 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477403] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJaCo014531@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477403 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:36 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477417] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJnlG014828@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477417 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:48 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477474] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKYRl016183@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477474 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:33 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477421] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJrlD014943@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477421 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:52 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477420] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJqWw014914@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477420 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:51 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477452] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKJRS015867@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477452 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:19 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477408] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJgCv014696@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477408 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:42 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477400] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJYVY014488@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477400 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:34 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477419] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJpQa014884@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477419 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:50 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477473] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKXb5016161@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477473 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:32 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477378] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJKdY014246@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477378 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:19 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477436] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK4ap015460@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477436 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:03 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:35 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477475] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKZ81016213@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477475 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:34 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477405] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJcjU014579@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477405 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:37 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK3h7015438@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:02 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477374] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJI89014199@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477374 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:17 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:35 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477401] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJZ5p014514@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477401 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:35 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477393] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJTSH014399@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477393 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:28 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477331] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJ5M0013948@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477331 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:03 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477486] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKh9e016358@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477486 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:42 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:07 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477333] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJ70k013991@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477333 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:06 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477437] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK5Nh015481@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477437 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:04 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477443] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKASU015594@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:10 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKk3g016412@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:45 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477476] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKaec016235@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477476 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:35 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477468] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKUuf016092@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:29 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477406] kdeedu: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJe1a014625@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477406 --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:39 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477389] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJQcq014350@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477389 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:25 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477428] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJxXj015080@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:58 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477447] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKE5u015675@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477447 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:13 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477446] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKDBv015657@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477446 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:12 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477459] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKM1f015912@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477459 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:21 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477383] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJMQ8014280@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477383 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:21 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477438] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK6xP015509@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477438 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:05 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477457] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKLSX015887@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477457 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:20 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477445] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKCDK015634@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477445 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:11 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477398] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJXcQ014474@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477398 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:33 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477412] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJk2T014780@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477412 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:46 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477462] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKNxi015962@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:23 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:31 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477395] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJVDC014432@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477395 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:30 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477479] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKcxq016276@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:37 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477465] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKQbt016025@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477465 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:25 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKMi8015944@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:22 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477407] kdelibs: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJfAx014666@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477407 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:40 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477429] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK0w3015098@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477429 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:59 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477449] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKH0K015805@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477449 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:16 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJmEt014814@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:47 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477432] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK2m6015211@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:01 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477466] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKSNA016052@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477466 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:27 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJDZX014099@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:12 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJ8tV014009@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:07 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477422] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJscV014970@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:54 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJGYi014161@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:15 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477451] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKIKp015841@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477451 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:18 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477467] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKTfM016070@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477467 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:28 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477418] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJo3L014858@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477418 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:49 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJiFw014737@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:43 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477387] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJP1W014329@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477387 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:24 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477411] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJjKB014759@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477411 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:45 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477431] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFK1Pf015115@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477431 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:00 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477385] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJNTf014297@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:22 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJ5n2013961@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:05 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:20:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477488] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111520.n0BFKjge016389@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477488 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:20:44 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477426] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJvVT015033@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477426 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:56 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477423] mathml-fonts: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJtN6014998@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477423 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:55 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 15:19:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:19:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477409] koffice: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111519.n0BFJhDC014717@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477409 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 10:19:42 EDT --- To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 16:06:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:06:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111606.n0BG6NDQ026266@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 Hans Ulrich Niedermann changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) --- Comment #5 from Hans Ulrich Niedermann 2009-01-11 11:06:22 EDT --- So... currently this package looks as follows: Upstream archive name: terminus-font Fedora source package: terminus-font Fedora package with X11 fonts: terminus-font-x11 Fedora package with console fonts: terminus-fonts-console In order to conform to the new guidelines, I'd need to a) rename the package with the X11 fonts (and probably the source package) to "terminus-fonts" (with an "s" at the end) b) Either move the console font to a separate source/binary package, or have the new "terminus-fonts" package create a subpackage like "terminus-fonts-console". Is this correct? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 16:18:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:18:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111618.n0BGIbAS024951@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 Hans Ulrich Niedermann changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #6 from Hans Ulrich Niedermann 2009-01-11 11:18:36 EDT --- Uhm. Forget comment #5. I had assumed this bug was for a different package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 16:27:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:27:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111627.n0BGRYZi026651@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 11:27:33 EDT --- Yes, sorry, next time I'll make sure the script use different summaries for different packages. Nevertheless to answer your comment what you wrote is correct (with the exception FPC is making noises about changing existing font package naming rules but I'm trying to dissuade them). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 18:39:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 13:39:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111839.n0BIdiJi020832@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477428, which changed state. Bug 477428 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 18:39:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 13:39:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477428] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111839.n0BIdh3q020806@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477428 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-11 13:39:42 EDT --- ok. Switched to dejavu. Closing again... feel free to re-open if you spot anything further. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 19:38:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 14:38:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477407] kdelibs: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901111938.n0BJcKLW028267@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477407 Rex Dieter changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |andreas.bierfert at lowlatency | |.de Component|kdelibs |koffice AssignedTo|than at redhat.com |andreas.bierfert at lowlatency | |.de --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter 2009-01-11 14:38:19 EDT --- fwiw, kdelibs dropped libkformula, which may make a re-appearance in koffice(2) soonish... moving. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 21:26:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:26:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901112126.n0BLQIX2018220@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477370, which changed state. Bug 477370 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 21:26:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:26:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477370] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901112126.n0BLQHt1018195@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477370 Jochen Schmitt changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #8 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-01-11 16:26:16 EDT --- Thank you for your help. I have now created a symlink to dajavu-sams in felder-2.48a-10, so I will close this bug now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 21:48:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:48:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901112148.n0BLmOUR018637@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 Lyos Gemini Norezel changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ON_DEV -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 21:48:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:48:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477466] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901112148.n0BLmrwY021693@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477466 Lyos Gemini Norezel changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ON_DEV -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sun Jan 11 22:19:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:19:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901112219.n0BMJaFp026780@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com, tcallawa at redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-11 17:19:36 EDT --- @spot: please check the licensing history is clean (seems so, but I'm no expert) @oget: ? please add a page ("packaging request") describing your font describing your font as documented in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle ? please make sure your description/summary does not contain trademarked terms belonging to hostile entities -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 00:58:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:58:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120058.n0C0wmcf019077@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 Hans Ulrich Niedermann changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) --- Comment #8 from Hans Ulrich Niedermann 2009-01-11 19:58:47 EDT --- Well... this is what I have found out. The ntedfont.pfa file appears (according to kfontview) to contain a number of special symbols for typesetting music, and a set of numbers. I know of no tool to find out whether these symbols conform to any special unicode, or other encoding, or whether this is just a symbol font which maps the codes of some normal characters to the shapes of some special symbols. In any case, it appears to be designed just for use within the nted application. Now, I can install the ntedfont.pfa file into the new place required by the new font policy, and symlink it to the old location so that nted can find it. The ntedfont.pfa file will be shipped in its own separate subpackage nted-fonts, which nted will now require. That is no problem. However, I'm not quite getting what to use as fontconfig file here: a) "ruleset numeral prefix" only talks about fonts of characters, not of special symbols. b) those special symbols fit into neither of the "sans-serif, serif, monospace, fantasy or cursive" standard families Where can I find more information about the suitable prefix and the family? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 01:25:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:25:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479521] Invalid character in ttf name table regarding copyright that crashes XML marshalling In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120125.n0C1PqXs024253@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479521 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #1 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-11 20:25:51 EDT --- updated in source repo rebuild tarball / zip https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/liberation-fonts/liberation-fonts-1.04.93.devel.tar.gz https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/liberation-fonts/liberation-fonts-1.04.93.devel.zip -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 01:54:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:54:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120154.n0C1sInB028837@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #10 from Adam Goode 2009-01-11 20:54:17 EDT --- I don't think it makes sense necessarily for this project to move to pango/cairo or such, as it does no rendering itself, just outputting PDF, PS, or HTML. As such it just uses the .pfa files internally to output PDF and PS. Also, the fonts all appear to be renamed urw-fonts in PFA format, or Deja Vu fonts in PFA format. I think the thing to do is: * Symlink the URW fonts to the system-installed fonts * Modify the code to call pfatopfb at the right time when embedding * Not ship the Deja Vu fonts, just map serif, monospace, sans to the URW versions * File bugs upstream Upstream makes few releases and generally moves slowly, so I'm not sure how fast it will go upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 02:36:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:36:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120236.n0C2a1ro006319@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #11 from Adam Goode 2009-01-11 21:35:59 EDT --- http://www.htmldoc.org/str.php?L196 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 04:15:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:15:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120415.n0C4F80G023542@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 --- Comment #7 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-11 23:15:07 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328691) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328691) .spec w/ %_font_pkg but not buildable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 04:13:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:13:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120413.n0C4DJWK023107@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) --- Comment #6 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-11 23:13:18 EDT --- I added: %_font_pkg -n uming -f *-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf uming.ttc in .spec file. Then it isn't buildable since then with errors: rpmbuild --define "_sourcedir /home/cchance/src/fedora/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel" --define "_spmake: *** [noarch] Error 1 ora/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel" --define "_builddir /home/cchance/src/fedora/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel" --define "_srcrpmdir /home/cchance/src/fedora/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel" --define "_rpmdir /home/cchance/src/fedora/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel" --define "dist .fc11" --define "fedora 11" --define "fc11 1" --target noarch -ba cjkunifonts.spec 2>&1 | tee .build--.log ; exit ${PIPESTATUS[0]} error: line 142: Second %post Building target platforms: noarch Building for target noarch What would I need to do to get it work? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 04:29:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:29:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120429.n0C4TM4u025706@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477452, which changed state. Bug 477452 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477452 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 04:29:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:29:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477452] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120429.n0C4TLE1025686@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477452 Parag changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Parag 2009-01-11 23:29:20 EDT --- already fixed in rawhide.http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=76447 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 06:53:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:53:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120653.n0C6r934018819@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 01:53:08 EDT --- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_%28FAQ%29#Where_is_the_rest_of_the_subpackaging_bits_in_spectemplate-fonts-multi.spec.3F http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_%28FAQ%29#What_happened_to_the_fc-cache_scriptlets_listed_in_previous_guidelines.3F http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_%28FAQ%29#The_templates_must_be_wrong.2C_rpm_crashes.21 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 06:59:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:59:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120659.n0C6xnht016998@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #13 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 01:59:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #10) > > * Not ship the Deja Vu fonts, just map serif, monospace, sans to the > > URW versions > > Sounds good. However DejaVu has more coverage than URW fonts, so mid-term it > would be good to use it again. Worst case you'll have to take care of your own Type1 DejaVu package in Fedora -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 06:57:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:57:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120657.n0C6vw6q016869@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 01:57:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > I don't think it makes sense necessarily for this project to move to > pango/cairo or such, as it does no rendering itself, just outputting PDF, PS, > or HTML. As such it just uses the .pfa files internally to output PDF and PS. This is one form of rendering too. But anyway the main point for you is to move to fontconfig in any form so you don't have to manage fonts in your package. > Also, the fonts all appear to be renamed urw-fonts in PFA format, or Deja Vu > fonts in PFA format. That's the usual duplication of system fonts in non-fontconfig apps. > I think the thing to do is: > > * Symlink the URW fonts to the system-installed fonts > > * Modify the code to call pfatopfb at the right time when embedding > > * Not ship the Deja Vu fonts, just map serif, monospace, sans to the > URW versions Sounds good. However DejaVu has more coverage than URW fonts, so mid-term it would be good to use it again. > * File bugs upstream > Upstream makes few releases and generally moves slowly, so I'm not sure how > fast it will go upstream. You'll only know by asking -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 07:12:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:12:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120712.n0C7Ccnb022138@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 02:12:37 EDT --- For symbol fonts you can skip the fontconfig bit, they mostly are one-of-a-kinds that don't really fit in existing classifications -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 09:15:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:15:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477452] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901120915.n0C9FmSo009512@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477452 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 04:15:47 EDT --- You still have a (harmless but) useless fontdir define in your spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 10:41:01 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:41:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-9 tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,1.13,1.14 Message-ID: <20090112104101.A178970123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6333 Modified Files: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec Log Message: Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-9/tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,v retrieving revision 1.13 retrieving revision 1.14 diff -u -r1.13 -r1.14 --- tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 4 Jan 2008 12:30:47 -0000 1.13 +++ tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 12 Jan 2009 10:40:31 -0000 1.14 @@ -6,10 +6,11 @@ Name: tetex-font-cm-lgc Version: 0.5 -Release: 9%{?dist} +Release: 11%{?dist} Summary: CM-LGC Type1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing -License: GPL +# Font exception +License: GPLv2+ with exceptions URL: http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/ps-type1/cm-lgc Source0: cm-lgc-%{ctan_date}.zip # upstream source - unversioned zip file @@ -38,10 +39,11 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{fontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{enc,map}/dvips/%{texpkg} install -p -m 644 tex/latex/%{texpkg}/* %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ +install -p -m 644 fonts/afm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/ofm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/ovf/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/type1/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ @@ -75,6 +77,7 @@ %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc COPYING HISTORY README %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} @@ -85,6 +88,12 @@ %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 0.5-11 +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) + +* Mon Sep 8 2008 Tom "spot" Callaway - 0.5-10 +- fix license tag + * Fri Jan 4 2008 Sarantis Paskalis - 0.5-9 - Drop -fonts requires. From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 10:42:02 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:42:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-10 tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,1.14,1.15 Message-ID: <20090112104202.CFDC970123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6473 Modified Files: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec Log Message: Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/F-10/tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,v retrieving revision 1.14 retrieving revision 1.15 diff -u -r1.14 -r1.15 --- tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 8 Sep 2008 14:10:23 -0000 1.14 +++ tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 12 Jan 2009 10:41:32 -0000 1.15 @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Name: tetex-font-cm-lgc Version: 0.5 -Release: 10%{?dist} +Release: 11%{?dist} Summary: CM-LGC Type1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing # Font exception @@ -39,10 +39,11 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{fontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{enc,map}/dvips/%{texpkg} install -p -m 644 tex/latex/%{texpkg}/* %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ +install -p -m 644 fonts/afm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/ofm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/ovf/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 fonts/type1/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ @@ -76,6 +77,7 @@ %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc COPYING HISTORY README %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} @@ -86,6 +88,9 @@ %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 0.5-11 +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) + * Mon Sep 8 2008 Tom "spot" Callaway - 0.5-10 - fix license tag From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 10:45:51 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/devel tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,1.14,1.15 Message-ID: <20090112104551.AA9EC70123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6942 Modified Files: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec Log Message: - Restructure spec file according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_SIG_Fedora_11_packaging_changes (bug #477461) - Split package to cm-lgc-fonts (.pfb and .afm) and tetex-font-cm-lgc (TeX stuff) - Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-cm-lgc/devel/tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec,v retrieving revision 1.14 retrieving revision 1.15 diff -u -r1.14 -r1.15 --- tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 8 Sep 2008 14:10:23 -0000 1.14 +++ tetex-font-cm-lgc.spec 12 Jan 2009 10:45:21 -0000 1.15 @@ -1,12 +1,15 @@ %define ctan_date 20051007 -%define texmf %{_datadir}/texmf -%define texfonts %{texmf}/fonts -%define texpkg cm-lgc -%define fontpath public/%{texpkg} +%define texmf %{_datadir}/texmf +%define texfonts %{texmf}/fonts +%define texpkg cm-lgc +%define texfontpath public/%{texpkg} +# definitions for fontpackages +%define fontname cm-lgc +%define fontpkg \-n\ cm-lgc-fonts Name: tetex-font-cm-lgc Version: 0.5 -Release: 10%{?dist} +Release: 11%{?dist} Summary: CM-LGC Type1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing # Font exception @@ -16,17 +19,25 @@ # upstream source - unversioned zip file # ftp://tug.ctan.org/pub/tex-archive/fonts/ps-type1/cm-lgc.zip BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) -Requires: tetex-latex grep +Requires: texlive-latex grep cm-lgc-fonts +BuildRequires: symlinks BuildArch: noarch %description -This package contains the CM-LGC fonts. These are PostScript Type 1 -fonts converted from the METAFONT sources of the Computer Modern font -families. CM-LGC supports the T1, T2A, LGR, and TS1 encodings, -i.e. Latin, Cyrillic, and Greek. There are also support files for -Omega/Lambda. +TeX support files for the CM-LGC font. +%define fontpkg \-n\ cm-lgc-fonts +%package %{fontpkg} +Summary: CM-LGC Type1 fonts +Group: User Interface/X + +%description %{fontpkg} +The PostScript Type 1 fonts converted from the METAFONT sources of +the Computer Modern font families. CM-LGC supports the T1, T2A, LGR, +and TS1 encodings, i.e. Latin, Cyrillic, and Greek. + +%_font_pkg -n %{fontpkg} *.pfb *.afm %prep %setup -q -n %{texpkg} @@ -39,53 +50,76 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,ofm,ovf,type1,tfm,vf}/%{texfontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{enc,map}/dvips/%{texpkg} -install -p -m 644 tex/latex/%{texpkg}/* %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ -install -p -m 644 fonts/ofm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 fonts/ovf/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 fonts/type1/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 fonts/tfm/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 fonts/vf/%{fontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 dvips/base/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/enc/dvips/%{texpkg}/ -install -p -m 644 dvips/config/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg}/ - +install -m 644 -p tex/latex/%{texpkg}/* %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ +install -m 644 -p fonts/ofm/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ofm/%{texfontpath}/ +install -m 644 -p fonts/ovf/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/ovf/%{texfontpath}/ +install -m 644 -p fonts/tfm/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{texfontpath}/ +install -m 644 -p fonts/vf/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{texfontpath}/ +install -m 644 -p dvips/base/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/enc/dvips/%{texpkg}/ +install -m 644 -p dvips/config/* %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg}/ + +#install .pfb and .afm files in %{_fontdir} as per the fedora font guidelines +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p fonts/type1/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p fonts/afm/%{texfontpath}/* %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} + +pushd %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +for pfb_file in *.pfb ; do + ln -s %{_fontdir}/$pfb_file %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{texfontpath}/$pfb_file +done +for afm_file in *.afm ; do + ln -s %{_fontdir}/$afm_file %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{texfontpath}/$afm_file +done +popd %clean rm -rf %{buildroot} -%post -/usr/bin/texhash -conffile="$(/usr/bin/texconfig-sys conf | /bin/grep updmap.cfg)" -if [ "$1" = "1" ]; then - /usr/bin/updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --enable Map %{texpkg}.map +%post +texhash +conffile="$(texconfig-sys conf | grep updmap.cfg)" +if [ "$1" -eq "1" ]; then + updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --enable Map %{texpkg}.map fi + %postun -conffile="$(/usr/bin/texconfig-sys conf | /bin/grep updmap.cfg)" -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - /usr/bin/updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --disable %{texpkg}.map +conffile="$(texconfig-sys conf | grep updmap.cfg)" +if [ "$1" -eq "0" ]; then + updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --disable %{texpkg}.map fi -/usr/bin/texhash +texhash %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc COPYING HISTORY README %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -%{texfonts}/ofm/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/ovf/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/ofm/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/ovf/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/tfm/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/type1/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/vf/%{texfontpath} %{texfonts}/enc/dvips/%{texpkg} %{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg} + %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 0.5-11 +- Restructure spec file according to + https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_SIG_Fedora_11_packaging_changes + (bug #477461) +- Split package to cm-lgc-fonts (.pfb and .afm) and tetex-font-cm-lgc + (TeX stuff) +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) + * Mon Sep 8 2008 Tom "spot" Callaway - 0.5-10 - fix license tag From pravins at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 10:45:59 2009 From: pravins at fedoraproject.org (Pravin Satpute) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/samyak-fonts/devel samyak-fonts.spec,1.5,1.6 Message-ID: <20090112104559.DB93470123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: pravins Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/samyak-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7015 Modified Files: samyak-fonts.spec Log Message: * Mon Jan 12 2009 Pravin Satpute 1.2.1-2 - bugzilla 477451 - updated spec Index: samyak-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/samyak-fonts/devel/samyak-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- samyak-fonts.spec 18 Sep 2008 09:35:10 -0000 1.5 +++ samyak-fonts.spec 12 Jan 2009 10:45:29 -0000 1.6 @@ -1,56 +1,90 @@ -%define xfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts -%define langlist "devanagari gujarati tamil malayalam oriya" +%define fontname samyak +%define langlist "devanagari gujarati tamil malayalam oriya" -Name: samyak-fonts -Version: 1.2.1 -Release: 1%{?dist} -Summary: Free Indian truetype/opentype fonts -Group: User Interface/X -License: GPLv3+ with exceptions -URL: https://sarovar.org/projects/samyak/ -Source: samyak-fonts-%{version}.tar.gz -BuildArch: noarch -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) +# Common description +%define common_desc \ +The Samyak package contains fonts for the display of \ +Scripts Devanagari, Gujarati, Malayalam, Oriya and Tamil + +Name: %{fontname}-fonts +Version: 1.2.1 +Release: 2%{?dist} +Summary: Free Indian truetype/opentype fonts +Group: User Interface/X +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +URL: https://sarovar.org/projects/samyak/ +Source: samyak-fonts-%{version}.tar.gz +BuildArch: noarch +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel +BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) %description -The Samyak package contains fonts for the display of -Scripts Devanagari, Gujarati, Malayalam, Oriya and Tamil +%common_desc + +%package common +Summary: Common files for smc-fonts +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem + +%description common +%common_desc + +%package devanagari +Summary: Open Type Fonts for Devanagari script +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +%description devanagari +This package contains truetype/opentype font for the display of \ +Scripts Devanagari. + +%package tamil +Summary: Open Type Fonts for Tamil script +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +%description tamil +This package contains truetype/opentype font for the display of \ +Scripts Tamil. + + +%package malayalam +Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +%description malayalam +This package contains truetype/opentype font for the display of \ +Scripts Malayalam. + +%package gujarati +Summary: Open Type Fonts for Gujarai script +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +%description gujarati +This package contains truetype/opentype font for the display of \ +Scripts Gujarati. + +%package oriya +Summary: Open Type Fonts for Oriya script +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +License: GPLv3+ with exceptions +%description oriya +This package contains truetype/opentype font for the display of \ +Scripts Oriya. + +%_font_pkg -n devanagari %{fontname}-devanagari/Samyak-*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n tamil %{fontname}-tamil/*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n malayalam %{fontname}-malayalam/*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n oriya %{fontname}-oriya/*.ttf + +%_font_pkg -n gujarati %{fontname}-gujarati/*.ttf -# mk_pkg -%define mk_pkg() \ -%package -n samyak-fonts-%1\ -Summary: Free %(echo %1 | sed -e "s/\\(.*\\)/\\u\\1/") font\ -Group: User Interface/X \ -Provides: ttfonts-%2 = 1.8-2\ -Obsoletes : ttfonts-%2 <= 1.8-1\ -\ -\ -%description -n samyak-fonts-%1\ -This package provides a free %(echo %1 | sed -e "s/\\(.*\\)/\\u\\1/") truetype/opentype font.\ -\ -%files -n samyak-fonts-%1\ -%defattr(-, root, root, -)\ -%doc COPYING README AUTHORS\ -%dir %{xfontdir}/samyak-%1\ -%{xfontdir}/samyak-%1/*.ttf\ -\ -%post -n samyak-fonts-%1 \ -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then \ - %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{xfontdir}/samyak-%1 \ -fi \ -\ -%postun -n samyak-fonts-%1 \ -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then \ - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then \ - %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{xfontdir}/samyak-%1 \ - fi \ -fi - -%mk_pkg gujarati gu -%mk_pkg devanagari hi -%mk_pkg malayalam ml -%mk_pkg oriya or -%mk_pkg tamil ta %prep %setup -q -n samyak-fonts-%{version} @@ -59,18 +93,28 @@ echo "Nothing to do in Build." %install -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -rf %{buildroot} for i in "%{langlist}" do - install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{xfontdir}/samyak-$i - install -m 0644 $i/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{xfontdir}/samyak-$i +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir}/samyak-$i +install -m 0644 -p $i/* %{buildroot}%{_fontdir}/samyak-$i done %clean -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -fr %{buildroot} + + +%files common +%defattr(-,root,root,-) +%doc COPYING README AUTHORS +%dir %{_fontdir} %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Pravin Satpute 1.2.1-2 +- bugzilla 477451 +- updated spec + * Thu Sep 18 2008 Pravin Satpute 1.2.1-1 - upstream release 1.2.1 - Added Unicode 5.1 support in Samyak-Devanagari From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 10:48:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121048.n0CAm82W029099@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 Sarantis Paskalis changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-12 05:48:07 EDT --- Fixed in 0.5-11 (rawhide) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 10:48:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:48:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121048.n0CAm9XD029126@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477461, which changed state. Bug 477461 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 11:43:58 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-9 tetex-font-kerkis.spec,1.18,1.19 Message-ID: <20090112114358.D62B070123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14361 Modified Files: tetex-font-kerkis.spec Log Message: Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-kerkis.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-9/tetex-font-kerkis.spec,v retrieving revision 1.18 retrieving revision 1.19 diff -u -r1.18 -r1.19 --- tetex-font-kerkis.spec 4 Jan 2008 12:45:06 -0000 1.18 +++ tetex-font-kerkis.spec 12 Jan 2009 11:43:58 -0000 1.19 @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Name: tetex-font-kerkis Version: 2.0 -Release: 15%{?dist} +Release: 16%{?dist} Summary: Kerkis type 1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing License: LPPL @@ -45,11 +45,12 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{tfm,type1,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,tfm,type1,vf}/%{fontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{map,enc}/dvips/%{texpkg} install -p -m 644 tex/{*.sty,*.fd} %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ install -p -m 644 tfm/*.tfm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath}/ +install -p -m 644 afm/*.afm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 type1/*.pfb %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 vf/*.vf %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 dvips/*.map %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg}/ @@ -81,6 +82,7 @@ %doc License.txt README.html %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} %{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg} @@ -89,6 +91,8 @@ %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-16 +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) * Fri Jan 4 2008 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-15 - Drop requirement for -fonts. From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 11:44:24 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:44:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-10 tetex-font-kerkis.spec,1.18,1.19 Message-ID: <20090112114424.6BF7370123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14397 Modified Files: tetex-font-kerkis.spec Log Message: Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-kerkis.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/F-10/tetex-font-kerkis.spec,v retrieving revision 1.18 retrieving revision 1.19 diff -u -r1.18 -r1.19 --- tetex-font-kerkis.spec 4 Jan 2008 12:45:06 -0000 1.18 +++ tetex-font-kerkis.spec 12 Jan 2009 11:43:54 -0000 1.19 @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Name: tetex-font-kerkis Version: 2.0 -Release: 15%{?dist} +Release: 16%{?dist} Summary: Kerkis type 1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing License: LPPL @@ -45,11 +45,12 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{tfm,type1,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,tfm,type1,vf}/%{fontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{map,enc}/dvips/%{texpkg} install -p -m 644 tex/{*.sty,*.fd} %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ install -p -m 644 tfm/*.tfm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath}/ +install -p -m 644 afm/*.afm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 type1/*.pfb %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 vf/*.vf %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath}/ install -p -m 644 dvips/*.map %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg}/ @@ -81,6 +82,7 @@ %doc License.txt README.html %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} %{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath} %{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg} @@ -89,6 +91,8 @@ %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-16 +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) * Fri Jan 4 2008 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-15 - Drop requirement for -fonts. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 11:46:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 06:46:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477462] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121146.n0CBkPP0009370@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 Sarantis Paskalis changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-12 06:46:24 EDT --- Fixed in 2.0-16 (rawhide) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 11:46:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 06:46:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121146.n0CBkQMM009395@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477462, which changed state. Bug 477462 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From sarantis at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 12 11:46:08 2009 From: sarantis at fedoraproject.org (Sarantis Paskalis) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:46:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/devel tetex-font-kerkis.spec,1.18,1.19 Message-ID: <20090112114608.DECE170123@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: sarantis Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14662 Modified Files: tetex-font-kerkis.spec Log Message: - Restructure spec file according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_SIG_Fedora_11_packaging_changes (bug #477462) - Split package to cm-lgc-fonts (.pfb and .afm) and tetex-font-cm-lgc (TeX stuff) - Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) Index: tetex-font-kerkis.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/tetex-font-kerkis/devel/tetex-font-kerkis.spec,v retrieving revision 1.18 retrieving revision 1.19 diff -u -r1.18 -r1.19 --- tetex-font-kerkis.spec 4 Jan 2008 12:45:06 -0000 1.18 +++ tetex-font-kerkis.spec 12 Jan 2009 11:45:38 -0000 1.19 @@ -1,12 +1,15 @@ -%define ctan_date 20051007 -%define texmf %{_datadir}/texmf -%define texfonts %{texmf}/fonts -%define texpkg kerkis -%define fontpath %{texpkg} +%define ctan_date 20051007 +%define texmf %{_datadir}/texmf +%define texfonts %{texmf}/fonts +%define texpkg kerkis +%define texfontpath %{texpkg} +# definitions for fontpackages +%define fontname kerkis +%define fontpkg \-n\ %{fontname}-fonts Name: tetex-font-kerkis Version: 2.0 -Release: 15%{?dist} +Release: 16%{?dist} Summary: Kerkis type 1 fonts for LaTeX Group: Applications/Publishing License: LPPL @@ -15,23 +18,31 @@ # upstream source - unversioned zip file # ftp://tug.ctan.org/pub/tex-archive/fonts/greek/kerkis.zip BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) -Requires: tetex-latex +Requires: texlive-latex kerkis-fonts = %{version}-%{release} BuildArch: noarch %description -This package contains the Kerkis type 1 fonts for LaTeX. +TeX support files for the Kerkis Type 1 font. -These fonts are particularly useful for typesetting Greek. The -Greek repertoire includes full support for polytonic Greek, Greek -numerals, and double forms of several letters that occur in variant -forms. +%define fontpkg \-n\ kerkis-fonts +%package %{fontpkg} +Summary: Kerkis Type1 fonts +Group: User Interface/X + +%description %{fontpkg} +Kerkis type 1 fonts for LaTeX. These fonts are particularly useful +for typesetting Greek. The Greek repertoire includes full support for +polytonic Greek, Greek numerals, and double forms of several letters +that occur in variant forms. The Latin part of the font comprise old style numbers, accented Latin characters and common ligatures (including frequently omitted ligatures such as "fj"). -Please see the file "License.txt" for details on the use of this font. + +%_font_pkg -n %{fontpkg} *.pfb *.afm + %prep @@ -45,50 +56,72 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{tfm,type1,vf}/%{fontpath} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{afm,tfm,type1,vf}/%{texfontpath} mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/{map,enc}/dvips/%{texpkg} install -p -m 644 tex/{*.sty,*.fd} %{buildroot}%{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg}/ -install -p -m 644 tfm/*.tfm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 type1/*.pfb %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath}/ -install -p -m 644 vf/*.vf %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath}/ +install -p -m 644 tfm/*.tfm %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/tfm/%{texfontpath}/ +install -p -m 644 vf/*.vf %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/vf/%{texfontpath}/ install -p -m 644 dvips/*.map %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg}/ install -p -m 644 dvips/*.enc %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/enc/dvips/%{texpkg}/ +#install .pfb and .afm files in %{_fontdir} as per the fedora font guidelines +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p type1/* %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p afm/* %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} + +pushd %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +for pfb_file in *.pfb ; do + ln -s %{_fontdir}/$pfb_file %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/type1/%{texfontpath}/$pfb_file +done +for afm_file in *.afm ; do + ln -s %{_fontdir}/$afm_file %{buildroot}%{texfonts}/afm/%{texfontpath}/$afm_file +done +popd + %clean rm -rf %{buildroot} %post -/usr/bin/texhash -conffile="$(/usr/bin/texconfig-sys conf | /bin/grep updmap.cfg)" +texhash +conffile="$(texconfig-sys conf | grep updmap.cfg)" if [ "$1" = "1" ]; then - /usr/bin/updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --enable Map %{texpkg}.map + updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --enable Map %{texpkg}.map fi %postun -conffile="$(/usr/bin/texconfig-sys conf | /bin/grep updmap.cfg)" +conffile="$(texconfig-sys conf | grep updmap.cfg)" if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - /usr/bin/updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --disable %{texpkg}.map + updmap-sys --quiet --nohash --cnffile ${conffile} --disable %{texpkg}.map fi -/usr/bin/texhash +texhash %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc License.txt README.html %{texmf}/tex/latex/%{texpkg} -%{texfonts}/tfm/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/type1/%{fontpath} -%{texfonts}/vf/%{fontpath} +%{texfonts}/afm/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/tfm/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/type1/%{texfontpath} +%{texfonts}/vf/%{texfontpath} %{texfonts}/map/dvips/%{texpkg} %{texfonts}/enc/dvips/%{texpkg} %changelog +* Mon Jan 12 2009 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-16 +- Restructure spec file according to + https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_SIG_Fedora_11_packaging_changes + (bug #477462) +- Split package to cm-lgc-fonts (.pfb and .afm) and tetex-font-cm-lgc + (TeX stuff) +- Include .afm files (forgotten in the previous versions) + * Fri Jan 4 2008 Sarantis Paskalis - 2.0-15 - Drop requirement for -fonts. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 13:05:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:05:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479673] New: Ugly appearance of windows and wrong calculation of character width's by eclipse Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Ugly appearance of windows and wrong calculation of character width's by eclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479673 Summary: Ugly appearance of windows and wrong calculation of character width's by eclipse Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: pango AssignedTo: besfahbo at redhat.com ReportedBy: hedayat at grad.com QAContact: extras-qa at fedoraproject.org CC: besfahbo at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Classification: Fedora Description of problem: In Fedora 10, when I set the system locale to fa_IR (Persian Language) and log in to gnome many things are larger which results in an ugly desktop. Gnome panel's minimum height which is 24 in en_US locale is 29 in fa_IS locale. Windows' title bars are also are larger (more height). The worst thing is that these sizes do not depend on the selected font! Totally, the desktop is uglier in fa_IR locale. Things are still not that bad till now, but in Eclipse when you enable "show print margin" option in its text editor settings, the line which is intended to show the 80 character margin appears in the middle of the editor, around character 50. In en_US locale, it appears in the correct position. How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.In the gdm login screen, select Persian language and login 2.You can see that gnome applet is larger, and larger icons appear in it as a result 3.Run eclipse and enable "show print margin", in its text editor preferences. 4. The print margin in eclipse appears in the middle of the text editor area, which is around character 50, while it should appear at the end of 80th character. Expected results: Normal window sizes and correct estimation of print margin in eclipse text editor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 13:37:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:37:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121337.n0CDbgNd002626@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 --- Comment #2 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2009-01-12 08:37:41 EDT --- Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/serafettin-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/serafettin-fonts-0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) I also made a wiki page for this font: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Serafettin_fonts -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 13:50:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:50:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121350.n0CDo6kk002227@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #14 from Adam Goode 2009-01-12 08:50:05 EDT --- Upstream was very fast in responding. They say it is unacceptable to remove DejaVu support, so I will probably have to package Type1 DejaVu. I can then patch htmldoc to use the URW fonts and use popen to call t1ascii at runtime. That should fix things up for now. Ultimately, htmldoc should use fontconfig, but I think that is long term since (correct me if I'm wrong) htmldoc would have to learn to directly read more font formats for this to be useful. Currently it only reads afm/pfa files and it hardcodes the FontName, so that it doesn't really need to parse or process the font files themselves, only embed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 13:57:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:57:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121357.n0CDvUik003554@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477433, which changed state. Bug 477433 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 13:57:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:57:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121357.n0CDvTOn003529@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 Hans Ulrich Niedermann changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |nted-1.4.17-2.fc11 Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #10 from Hans Ulrich Niedermann 2009-01-12 08:57:28 EDT --- I think this should be fixed in nted-1.4.17-2.fc11 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1046825 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 14:15:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121415.n0CEFAoc010699@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 09:15:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > Ultimately, htmldoc should use fontconfig, but I think that is long term since > (correct me if I'm wrong) htmldoc would have to learn to directly read more > font formats for this to be useful. I think you can specify the font formats you can handle in your fontconfig queries so this part should not be a blocker (ping behdad if you want more info) That takes care of the symlinking stuff but still requires availability of fonts in one of the formats the app understands. > Currently it only reads afm/pfa files and > it hardcodes the FontName, so that it doesn't really need to parse or process > the font files themselves, only embed. Also we have lots of OTF fonts in the distro and OTF is the Type1 successor (should be all CFF data inside), so it may be easier for upstream so add support for OTF instead of TTF. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 15:26:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:26:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 447298] Qt 4 uses Nimbus Sans L (Helvetica) instead of DejaVu Sans (Sans Serif) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121526.n0CFQQ73026806@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447298 --- Comment #20 from Rex Dieter 2009-01-12 10:26:24 EDT --- Woo, looks like 0263-fix-fontconfig-handling.diff in latest qt-copy patches may finally address this upstream, so can try/test removing our local qt-x11-opensource-src-4.3.4-no-hardcoded-font-aliases.patch I'll test it out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 16:19:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:19:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477466] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121619.n0CGJo2F003808@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477466 --- Comment #3 from Lyos Gemini Norezel 2009-01-12 11:19:49 EDT --- Updates are in koji now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 16:19:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:19:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121619.n0CGJUiA006076@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 --- Comment #2 from Lyos Gemini Norezel 2009-01-12 11:19:29 EDT --- Updates are in Koji now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 18:12:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:12:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121812.n0CICJ4w027486@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 --- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-12 13:12:18 EDT --- Licensing history looks clean, I will assume it is unless evidence to the contrary appears. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 19:20:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:20:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121920.n0CJK1Q9008717@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-12 14:20:00 EDT --- yum-3.2.21-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yum-3.2.21-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 19:28:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478748] Fails to install python-twyt In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901121928.n0CJS0Yw011304@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478748 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-12 14:27:59 EDT --- yum-3.2.21-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/yum-3.2.21-2.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 21:04:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:04:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122104.n0CL4i4o002013@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 21:59:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:59:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122159.n0CLxgna014219@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net |oget.fedora at gmail.com Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 16:59:41 EDT --- If spot is ok with the package I'm ok too. Full review (going a bit deeper than usual since you're also upstream) 1. Maybe change the summary to "A sans-serif cartoon font" 2. No need to write about ISO-8859-1 in the description, you'll increase the coverage with time (I hope) and then get stuck with a wrong summary (please target MES-1 coverage at least) 3. Please wrap your description at 79 columns, not 60 4. There is no need to go at such lengths to make the rpmlint relative warning go away http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#rpmlint_complains_of_absolute_symbolic_links.21 5. please make your package name match the font name (if it is Serafettin Cartoon, name the package serafettin-cartoon-fonts) ????? 6. consider using the .txt extension for your documentation files, that makes GUI users much happier 7. It's a good idea to add a fontlog.txt that traces the font history 8. your package says it's at 0.4 but the font files say they're at 0.3. Don't do that (a good trick is to have a version variable in your makefile and change the generated font version to this variable at build time, cf dejavu and liberation) 9. please ask on the fontforge mailing list how to change the FStype so the restricted font warning goes away. Most people will take it as the font not being really gpl 10. Please specify the GPL version(s) in the font metadata (v1, v2, v2+, v3, etc) (and no need to write it's under the GPL twice in the copyright field) 11. the subfamily/style ttf name in the main file seems wrong 12. More generally it looks like you still need to clean up your font metadata a bit more 13. rawhide fontforge complains about misplaced mu in the font files 14. should probably not be classified as a sans-serif font in the fontconfig file, but as a cursive or decorative one (your OS/2 metadata says it's decorative, but fontforge classifies Comic Sans MS as cursive=script in OS/2 speak) 15. please look at the substitution-font-template template in fontpackages-devel to tell fontconfig to use your font instead of TSCu_Comic when a document requests TSCu_Comic and it's not installed on-system 16. a font with Tamil glyphs should use 65 fontconfig prio at least 17. you can use http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0B80.pdf to place the tamil glyphs on the right unicode points, it would be a shame to lose them 18. adding some info in the readme on what a Serafettin is would be nice for us not in the know Apart from the package name there's nothing blocking or that can't be handled upstream, so I'll tentatively approve the package. But please change its name before filling in the CVS request ??? APPROVED ??? You can now continue from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a Reassigning the request, my part is now done -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 22:04:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:04:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-fonts - Comic Sans fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122204.n0CM4jrE012809@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 17:04:44 EDT --- (also you can probably get yourself fedorahosted if you'd like to, and share the fedora fonts mailing list with lohit, liberation and the fonts sig) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 22:50:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:50:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122250.n0CMoTR0022371@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477417, which changed state. Bug 477417 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477417 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 22:50:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:50:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477417] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122250.n0CMoSre022345@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477417 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-12 17:50:27 EDT --- Lincity-ng-data only had one font in it, a copy of DejaVu Sans. It is now deleting that file during %install and making a symlink (and Requires: dejavu-fonts-sans). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:09:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:09:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122309.n0CN9E2p025859@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 Orion Poplawski changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:07:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:07:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122307.n0CN7gOg029143@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 --- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski 2009-01-12 18:07:41 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328799) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328799) freefont.spec Nicolas - Can you comment on this updated spec? Not really sure what the appropriate font name for this package is. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:24:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:24:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122324.n0CNOkGC032214@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477461, which changed state. Bug 477461 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|RAWHIDE | Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:24:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:24:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122324.n0CNOe9V032134@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:24:38 EDT --- Thank you for working on this I realise it's not easy to be the first TEX packager to adapt your packages. Anyway, some QA feedback: 1. you need to add the template (build)requires on fontpackages* for build mock/koji to work 2. you have several different font families in this package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#What_is_this_font_family_thing.3F Each one needs a separate font subpackage http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#How_many_font_files_can_I_put_in_a_font_.28sub.29package.3F 3. since you'll have multiple font subpackages, you need to create a common subpackage they depend on that will own the font package directory and the fonts COPYING 4. I'm not sure your (duplicated) %define fontpkg \-n\ cm-lgc-fonts is a good idea then. 5. are you sure you can not use a subpackages named srpmname-foo? Removing the srpmname prefix will confuse users. 6. some fontconfig files would be nice, there are good templates in fontpackages-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:30:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122330.n0CNU8HE001055@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nicolas.mailhot at l | |aposte.net) | --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:30:06 EDT --- You need to use the %_font_pkg macro http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#What_is_a_compliant_font_.28sub.29package.3F I'm sure this will make your task easier and simplify your spec considerably For examples, see the dejavu, vera, mgopen, abyssinica etc packages As for the naming, my suggested guideline is http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#How_should_I_name_my_fonts_.28sub.29package.28s.29.3F but FPC is discussing changes to it. spot has probably the best view on what the final rules are likely to be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:41:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:41:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122341.n0CNfFtG032251@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477462, which changed state. Bug 477462 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:41:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:41:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477462] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122341.n0CNfEhA032227@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:41:12 EDT --- Needs at least part of the fixes pointed in cm-lgc (don't have time to do a thorough check on this one, sorry) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:43:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:43:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477433] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122343.n0CNhaXm003592@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477433 --- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:43:35 EDT --- Looks ok. Since FPC is still discussing font packages naming details, -fonts is fine for now -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:50:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:50:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122350.n0CNogQg001350@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:50:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Some darkgarden QA > Also there are simple fontconfig templates in fontpackages-devel that only > require filling of your font name, so it may be a good idea to add one to your > package Forget this part, that's me needing to stop looking at spec files for a while -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:48:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:48:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122348.n0CNmUN5004537@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:48:29 EDT --- Some darkgarden QA You should not need the %{_fontdir}/*.ttf line That's the source of this build warning warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/fonts/darkgarden/DarkGarden.ttf Also there are simple fontconfig templates in fontpackages-devel that only require filling of your font name, so it may be a good idea to add one to your package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Mon Jan 12 23:56:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:56:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477466] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901122356.n0CNuem5002502@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477466 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-12 18:56:39 EDT --- You need to remove the %{_fontdir}/foo*.ttf lines from your files section or the fonts will be duplicated in the common subpackage which is not what we want -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 00:41:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:41:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130041.n0D0fvTJ014569@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #5 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-12 19:41:55 EDT --- Have you test on non Firefox (or similar like epiphany)? Firefox has pango. Also, please turn off anti-aliasing before testing. I could only fix hinting but not how pango operates. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 00:56:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:56:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130056.n0D0u87p013366@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #6 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-12 19:56:07 EDT --- Hi, could I ask which part of the glyph you feel is ugly? Personally I feel 'R' looks similar as other characters. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 01:06:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:06:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 447298] Qt 4 uses Nimbus Sans L (Helvetica) instead of DejaVu Sans (Sans Serif) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130106.n0D16h94019173@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447298 Alexei Podtelezhnikov changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |apodtele at ucsd.edu --- Comment #21 from Alexei Podtelezhnikov 2009-01-12 20:06:39 EDT --- Are we making progress on bug 355271, or http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57485 ? That'd be cool and highly anticipated! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 01:47:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:47:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130147.n0D1leNM022331@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Jens Petersen changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen 2009-01-12 20:47:40 EDT --- Rahul what is the status of this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 06:06:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:06:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130606.n0D663c2011802@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |psatpute at redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 01:06:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) > +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #233257 +++ > > Description of problem: > Wrong Conjuct combinations are formed for U0C9D+U0CCA and U0C9D+U0CCB. > > Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): > fonts-kannada-2.1.5-3.fc8 > > How reproducible: > 1. Every Time > > Steps to Reproduce: > 1. Open gnome-character-map. > 2. Select U0C9D followed by U0CCA followed by U0C9D followed by U0CCB. > > Actual results: > As shown in the attached image > > Expected results: > > As shown by the following steps: > 1. Install http://kannadakasturi.com/font/brhknd.ttf. i tried this font it is not a valid unicode font all kannada characters are pasted on Latin Unicode positions, i doubt this is done for transliteration purpose There is no characters on Kannada unicode code point, so i think it will default show Lohit Kannada for Kannada character display -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 06:15:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:15:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130615.n0D6FvM6013612@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 --- Comment #6 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 01:15:57 EDT --- is this ISCII/ISFOC based fonts? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 06:31:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:31:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130631.n0D6VG61011628@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|8 |10 --- Comment #7 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 01:31:15 EDT --- tested same combination in F10 for gedit things working fine -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 06:35:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:35:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130635.n0D6Zf5V012352@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|10 |8 --- Comment #9 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 01:35:41 EDT --- mistakenly changed version from F8 to F10 reverting back -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 06:33:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:33:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130633.n0D6X3oY016293@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 --- Comment #8 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 01:33:02 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328837) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328837) attachemnt showing unicode combination 0c9d-0cca-0c9d-0ccb -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 07:40:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:40:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477451] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130740.n0D7eS3a028893@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477451 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED --- Comment #3 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 02:40:27 EDT --- updates specs built is for rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 07:42:47 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:42:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-cm-lgc Message-ID: <20090113074247.AEC951F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-cm-lgc has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On x86_64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On i386: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On ppc64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 07:42:50 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:42:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis Message-ID: <20090113074250.89D5C1F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 07:42:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:42:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 448078] [ml-IN] Font size problem with Meera In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130742.n0D7gkkk029170@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448078 Pravin Satpute changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #3 from Pravin Satpute 2009-01-13 02:42:45 EDT --- removed needinfo flag -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 08:59:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:59:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130859.n0D8xhRr007063@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 Ankur Sinha changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) | --- Comment #7 from Ankur Sinha 2009-01-13 03:59:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > PS for the fontforge warning, ask on the fontforge mailing list hi, I've asked. No reply till date. No help on the IRC too. I'll try looking elsewhere. Any suggestions? Also,I havent packaged a multi font yet so it will take me a while to understand the new spec. I'll refer the fonts already packaged and get it done as quickly as possible. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 08:57:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:57:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130857.n0D8vTl0012197@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 Ankur Sinha changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(sanjay_ankur at yaho | |o.co.in) | --- Comment #18 from Ankur Sinha 2009-01-13 03:57:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) > (In reply to comment #15) > > > The new spec template says "change *.ttf to where your files actually are". I > > dint quite get that. > > You did ok, I've tried to clarify the wiki page ping me if it's still unclear > > > Also, rpmlint for the rpm gives this warning.. : "cf-bonveno-fonts.noarch: W: > > symlink-should-be-relative /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-cf-bonveno.conf > > /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/60-cf-bonveno.conf" > > This is an rpmlint of dubious utility that will be discussed by FPC soonish. In > the meanwhile, ignore it > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Absolute_symlinks_in_fonts_templates_%282009-01-02%29 > > Please make your fontconfig file adhere more closely to the basic template in > fontpackages-devel. > > Otherwise, everything else seems fine hi, I have the package installed. I dont know the location of the templates :( . Can you tell me where these are located? I was still referring to the ones i had downloaded earlier. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 09:09:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:09:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF font In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130909.n0D99Hjr015260@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457955 --- Comment #19 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 04:09:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) > I have the package installed. I dont know the location of the templates :( rpm -ql packagename will get you the file listing in packagename -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 09:11:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:11:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130911.n0D9BmIx010641@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476720 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 04:11:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > PS for the fontforge warning, ask on the fontforge mailing list > I've asked. No reply till date. No help on the IRC too. I'll try looking > elsewhere. Any suggestions? You can try to ask eimai or moyogo on #dejavu. Otherwise, not idea :(. > Also,I havent packaged a multi font yet so it will take me a while to > understand the new spec. I'll refer the fonts already packaged and get it done > as quickly as possible. Ok. There should be plenty of examples to take inspiration from in rawhide right now (dejavu, vera, mgopen, etc) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 09:41:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:41:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477462] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130941.n0D9frVx022679@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 --- Comment #5 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-13 04:41:52 EDT --- They are more or less modifications of the same type. Will do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 09:42:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:42:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901130942.n0D9g0ae022701@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #5 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-13 04:41:59 EDT --- Thanks for the feedback. (In reply to comment #4) > Thank you for working on this I realise it's not easy to be the first TEX > packager to adapt your packages. Anyway, some QA feedback: > > 1. you need to add the template (build)requires on fontpackages* for build > mock/koji to work Bah, I would swear I had them in earlier versions. Will fix. > 2. you have several different font families in this package. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#What_is_this_font_family_thing.3F > > Each one needs a separate font subpackage > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#How_many_font_files_can_I_put_in_a_font_.28sub.29package.3F I am aware of that. However, the separation of the font families is a somewhat more difficult problem (the filenames are not so intuitive), so I left them to a later point in time. Well, ok I will give it a shot, since I already did it to mgopen-fonts. > 3. since you'll have multiple font subpackages, you need to create a common > subpackage they depend on that will own the font package directory and the > fonts COPYING OK. > 4. I'm not sure your (duplicated) %define fontpkg \-n\ cm-lgc-fonts is a good > idea then. Thanks for pointing to the duplication. What I was trying to do is having a subpackage name in line with other font packages (such as mgopen-fonts) instead of (te)tex-font-cm-lgc). Since a rename of the package is in order, and the font packages already carry the %{fontname}-fonts name, cm-lgc-fonts fits for the srpm name, cm-lgc-fonts-common, cm-lgc-fonts-roman, etc for the different families, and tex-fonts-cm-lgc for the TeX specific stuff. I think that would be the straightforward way of dealing with the mess The alternative would be to call the srpm tex-fonts-cm-lgc and suffix it with -common, -roman, -sans, etc. This, however, leads to names such as tex-font-cm-lgc-roman, which is not compatible with the rest of the fedora font packages. > 5. are you sure you can not use a subpackages named srpmname-foo? Removing the > srpmname prefix will confuse users. See above. > 6. some fontconfig files would be nice, there are good templates in > fontpackages-devel OK, I will come up with some fontconfig stuff for the families only (the encodings are a really dark area). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 10:36:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:36:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131036.n0DAavpC003090@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tcallawa at redhat.com --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 05:36:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Since a > rename of the package is in order Since IIRC the TEX packagers are preparing a mass rename TEX-side, and FPC is discussing changing the font package naming conventions to make them more "consistent", it's probably a good idea to discuss all this with spot so all the conflicting requirements may be made to fit somehow Or you'll need another rename run later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 11:13:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 06:13:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131113.n0DBD2EW010891@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #7 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-13 06:13:01 EDT --- I see. The current package is named tetex-font-cm-lgc. My proposal is to name the base package cm-lgc-fonts, split into subpackages cm-lgc-fonts-roman, cm-lgc-fonts-sans, cm-lgc-fonts-typewriter and cm-lgc-fonts-common. The TeX specific stuff is put in a subpackage name tex-fonts-cm-lgc (note that it is not a suffix of the main package, but I think the main focus of this package is the font itself rather than the enhancement of TeX). I am open to suggestions. Anyway, my altered specfile (and srpm) is currenly at http://gallagher.di.uoa.gr/any/rpms/cm-lgc-fonts/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 11:56:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 06:56:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131156.n0DBuQKo019228@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 06:56:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > I see. > > The current package is named tetex-font-cm-lgc. > My proposal is to name the base package cm-lgc-fonts, split into subpackages > cm-lgc-fonts-roman, cm-lgc-fonts-sans, cm-lgc-fonts-typewriter and > cm-lgc-fonts-common. The TeX specific stuff is put in a subpackage name > tex-fonts-cm-lgc (note that it is not a suffix of the main package, but I think > the main focus of this package is the font itself rather than the enhancement > of TeX). I'd rather avoid putting the affix used to identify pure font packages in a pure TEX package, but I guess it's ok here. @spot: Another solution would be to make have all binary font (sub)packages named srpmname-fontname-font so we could have srpm cm-lgc-fonts rpm cm-lgc-fonts-common (directory ownership, licensing files and other doc) cm-lgc-fonts-fontname1-font cm-lgc-fonts-fontname2-font ... cm-lgc-fonts-fontnameX-font cm-lgc-fonts-tex (TEX parts) this way every pure font package could end in -font, and every pure tex package in -tex The only drawback is that for font packages that contain a single font family you'll have to force subpackaging and accept redundant naming like srpm gfs-olga-fonts rpm gfs-olga-fonts-olga-font But it should work in all cases and produce consistent names. Including in non-font srpms srpm openoffice.org rpm openoffice.org-opensymbol-font (Another variant for single-font packages would be to use srpm gfs-olga-fonts rpm gfs-olga-font forcing a renaming but probably not too confusing to users) There are many possible choices, and they all fail if not applied consistently, so I hope FPC settles on one before each packager chooses a different option. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 12:09:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:09:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479100] [kn_IN] Conjunct combination of U0C9D with U0CCA/U0CCB is rendering wrongly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131209.n0DC9UgZ015865@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479100 Rahul Bhalerao changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|8 |rawhide --- Comment #10 from Rahul Bhalerao 2009-01-13 07:09:30 EDT --- As Pravin said (Comment 5), the example font given is not a unicode/opentype font. Thus it is not possible to understand correct rendering required for the case. Please provide the correct screenshot of expected output. Also, as the EOL for f8 is already reached the bug cannot be filed against f8, please make so making version to 'rawhide'. Please update if the bug is present in the current version of the font and fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 12:35:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:35:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131235.n0DCZexI022059@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #9 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-13 07:35:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > rpm > cm-lgc-fonts-common (directory ownership, licensing files and other doc) > cm-lgc-fonts-fontname1-font > cm-lgc-fonts-fontname2-font > ... > cm-lgc-fonts-fontnameX-font > cm-lgc-fonts-tex (TEX parts) (I am not sure this discussion belongs here, but this is the only proposal I am not really confortable with). I don't like the repetition of the f* word (font), so I would prefer it appears only once (I don't mind where). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 12:42:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:42:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 428427] [kn_IN][fonts-indic] - 0CB5+0CCA is wrongly rendering In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131242.n0DCgC9t023471@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428427 --- Comment #7 from Rahul Bhalerao 2009-01-13 07:42:10 EDT --- The brhknd font mentioned is not a unicode/opentype font. Please provide correct screenshots instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 13:04:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:04:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131304.n0DD4vZY002145@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(tcallawa at redhat.c | |om) --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 08:04:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > > rpm > > cm-lgc-fonts-common (directory ownership, licensing files and other doc) > > cm-lgc-fonts-fontname1-font > > cm-lgc-fonts-fontname2-font > > ... > > cm-lgc-fonts-fontnameX-font > > cm-lgc-fonts-tex (TEX parts) > > (I am not sure this discussion belongs here, @spot: I don't really know where the discussion is now that FPC has started working on it either :( I hope spot does something with all the info I CC him) > but this is the only proposal I am > not really comfortable with). I don't like the repetition of the f* word > (font), so I would prefer it appears only once (I don't mind where). I guess we could do something like srpm cm-lgc-fonts rpm cm-lgc-fonts-common (directory ownership, licensing files and other doc) cm-lgc-fontname1-font cm-lgc-fontname2-font ... cm-lgc-fontnameX-font cm-lgc-tex (TEX parts) srpm gfs-olga-fonts rpm gfs-olga-font srpm dejavu-fonts rpm dejavu-fonts-common dejavu-sans-font dejavu-serif-font dejavu-sans-mono-font srpm openoffice.org rpm openoffice.org-opensymbol-font (and openoffice.org-name2-font + openoffice.org-fonts common if it ever grows another font) It is more ?sthetically pleasing, but implies many packages where rpmname != srpm-name-foo. Though the variation is small enough that users could probably not notice. However that may make it a bit harder to document in guidelines Also that sort of breaks if you have a srpm named foo-fonts and a srpm named foo in the repo (don't think that's the case right now, may happen) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 14:24:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:24:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 447298] Qt 4 uses Nimbus Sans L (Helvetica) instead of DejaVu Sans (Sans Serif) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131424.n0DEOW26014356@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447298 --- Comment #22 from Kevin Kofler 2009-01-13 09:24:31 EDT --- That's a completely separate issue, please comment in bug 355271, not here. (And no, AFAIK it's not being worked on.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 15:01:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:01:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 447298] Qt 4 uses Nimbus Sans L (Helvetica) instead of DejaVu Sans (Sans Serif) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901131501.n0DF1I0e023613@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447298 --- Comment #23 from Rex Dieter 2009-01-13 10:01:16 EDT --- qt-copy patch tests out good here, local hack/patch removed in qt-4.4.3-10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 20:30:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:30:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-cartoon-fonts - Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901132030.n0DKU4C4030525@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |serafettin-fonts - Comic |serafettin-cartoon-fonts - |Sans fonts |Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2009-01-13 15:30:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: serafettin-cartoon-fonts Short Description: Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts Owners: oget Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: fonts-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 20:38:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:38:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-cartoon-fonts - Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901132038.n0DKcE65007068@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-13 15:38:13 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From oget at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 21:34:09 2009 From: oget at fedoraproject.org (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:34:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel import.log, NONE, 1.1 serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090113213409.1B23F7013F@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: oget Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15264/devel Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: import.log serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec Log Message: * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release --- NEW FILE import.log --- serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0_5-1_fc10:HEAD:serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm:1231882386 --- NEW FILE serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec --- %define fontname serafettin-cartoon %define fontconf 66-%{fontname}.conf %define archivename %{name}-%{version} Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 0.5 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://serafettin.sourceforge.net/ Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/serafettin/%{archivename}.tar.bz2 BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontforge BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description Serafettin aims to be a collection of free Latin fonts for daily usage. Currently it contains a free cartoon sans-serif font. It is based on Thukkaram Gopalrao's TSCu_Comic of tamillinux project. %prep %setup -q -n %{archivename} %build make %{?_smp_flags} %install rm -fr %{buildroot} DESTDIR=%{buildroot} make install install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{fontname}.conf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/%{fontconf} %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf %doc ChangeLog.txt COPYING.txt FONTLOG.txt README.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 21:33:38 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 13 Jan 2009 21:33:38 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +41a8673cb16fe0597eb5ef5c76a8336b serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 From oget at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 21:35:54 2009 From: oget at fedoraproject.org (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:35:54 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-9 import.log, NONE, 1.1 serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090113213554.10C287013F@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: oget Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15650/F-9 Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: import.log serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec Log Message: * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release --- NEW FILE import.log --- serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0_5-1_fc10:F-9:serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm:1231882487 --- NEW FILE serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec --- %define fontname serafettin-cartoon %define fontconf 66-%{fontname}.conf %define archivename %{name}-%{version} Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 0.5 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://serafettin.sourceforge.net/ Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/serafettin/%{archivename}.tar.bz2 BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontforge BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description Serafettin aims to be a collection of free Latin fonts for daily usage. Currently it contains a free cartoon sans-serif font. It is based on Thukkaram Gopalrao's TSCu_Comic of tamillinux project. %prep %setup -q -n %{archivename} %build make %{?_smp_flags} %install rm -fr %{buildroot} DESTDIR=%{buildroot} make install install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{fontname}.conf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/%{fontconf} %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf %doc ChangeLog.txt COPYING.txt FONTLOG.txt README.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-9/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 21:35:23 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-9/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 13 Jan 2009 21:35:23 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +41a8673cb16fe0597eb5ef5c76a8336b serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 From oget at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 21:37:20 2009 From: oget at fedoraproject.org (Orcan Ogetbil) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:37:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-10 import.log, NONE, 1.1 serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090113213720.A75CB7013F@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: oget Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15968/F-10 Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: import.log serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec Log Message: * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release --- NEW FILE import.log --- serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0_5-1_fc10:F-10:serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm:1231882586 --- NEW FILE serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec --- %define fontname serafettin-cartoon %define fontconf 66-%{fontname}.conf %define archivename %{name}-%{version} Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 0.5 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv2+ URL: http://serafettin.sourceforge.net/ Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/serafettin/%{archivename}.tar.bz2 BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontforge BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description Serafettin aims to be a collection of free Latin fonts for daily usage. Currently it contains a free cartoon sans-serif font. It is based on Thukkaram Gopalrao's TSCu_Comic of tamillinux project. %prep %setup -q -n %{archivename} %build make %{?_smp_flags} %install rm -fr %{buildroot} DESTDIR=%{buildroot} make install install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{fontname}.conf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/%{fontconf} %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} %_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf %doc ChangeLog.txt COPYING.txt FONTLOG.txt README.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Tue Jan 13 2009 - 0.5-1 - New version with various fixes suggested by review in RHBZ#479596 * Sun Jan 11 2009 - 0.4-1 - New version with a name change (comic -> cartoon) * Sun Dec 28 2008 - 0.3-1 - Initial release Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-10/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 13 Jan 2009 21:36:50 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/F-10/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 13 Jan 2009 20:38:31 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 13 Jan 2009 21:36:50 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +41a8673cb16fe0597eb5ef5c76a8336b serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.tar.bz2 From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 21:55:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:55:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-cartoon-fonts - Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901132155.n0DLtCXg016318@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-13 16:55:11 EDT --- serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 22:40:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:40:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 447298] Qt 4 uses Nimbus Sans L (Helvetica) instead of DejaVu Sans (Sans Serif) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901132240.n0DMeYa6032625@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447298 --- Comment #24 from Alexei Podtelezhnikov 2009-01-13 17:40:33 EDT --- Re: Comment #22 I am sorry I pointed out that this bug that you reported was likely related to the bug I reported a year earlier. Just like in my bug 355271, you first didn't realize that the problem is because Qt essentially ignores fontconfig. And this is exactly the same conclusion I reached in te earlier bug. So I beg to differ. The root cause of the problems is the same! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 23:27:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:27:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901132327.n0DNRQ0T009456@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-13 18:27:25 EDT --- After a mail exchange with Tom the new naming rules will probably look like that http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) As your package is one of the most complex naming-wise please check you're ok with the proposal (or suggest amendments) As for the split in subpackages, please note that http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 explicitelly authorises grouping of "font families which are designed to extend other font families with larger Unicode coverage", so you don't need to create a different subpackage for all the regional parts of CM roman, for example (though the fontconfig part will probably need some work with behdad) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Tue Jan 13 23:48:23 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gucharmap (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:48:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 162370] Print the table! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090113234823.21F6F23F504@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370 gucharmap | general | Ver: 1.4.x Roozbeh Pournader changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |roozbeh at gmail.com ------- Comment #4 from Roozbeh Pournader 2009-01-13 23:48 UTC ------- Saw this in the roadmap: GNOME Character Map * Ability to print charts of characters with pangocairo Assuming this is the bug, just wanted to say that any printed charts may not use the same layout used by the Unicode Consortium, as they consider it copyrighted. Just use a different layout. -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370. From roozbeh at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 14 02:05:27 2009 From: roozbeh at fedoraproject.org (Roozbeh Pournader) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/doulos-fonts/devel .cvsignore, 1.6, 1.7 doulos-fonts.spec, 1.6, 1.7 sources, 1.6, 1.7 Message-ID: <20090114020527.8EA6F70136@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: roozbeh Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/doulos-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21116 Modified Files: .cvsignore doulos-fonts.spec sources Log Message: * Tue Jan 13 2009 Roozbeh Pournader - 4.104-1 - Update main font to 4.104 (with Unicode 5.1 support) - Remove Doulos Literacy (not maintained anymore) - Last update before conversion to new fonts policy Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/doulos-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.6 retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.6 -r1.7 --- .cvsignore 11 Dec 2007 14:17:36 -0000 1.6 +++ .cvsignore 14 Jan 2009 02:04:57 -0000 1.7 @@ -1,2 +1 @@ -DoulosSIL4.100.zip -DoulosSILLit4.0.14.r1.zip +DoulosSIL4.104.zip Index: doulos-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/doulos-fonts/devel/doulos-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.6 retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.6 -r1.7 --- doulos-fonts.spec 11 Dec 2007 14:17:36 -0000 1.6 +++ doulos-fonts.spec 14 Jan 2009 02:04:57 -0000 1.7 @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ %define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/doulos -%define litversion 4.0.14 +%define docversion 4.100 Name: doulos-fonts -Version: 4.100 +Version: 4.104 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Doulos SIL fonts @@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ URL: http://scripts.sil.org/DoulosSILFont # Sources can be downloaded from http://scripts.sil.org/DoulosSIL_download#FontsDownload Source0: DoulosSIL%{version}.zip -Source1: DoulosSILLit%{litversion}.r1.zip BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) BuildArch: noarch @@ -23,9 +22,8 @@ %prep -%setup -q -c -a 1 -mv 0NRSI/RFS/documentation/DoulosSILLiteracy/FONTLOG.txt FONTLOG-Literacy.txt -mv DoulosSILLiteracy/*.ttf . +%setup -q -c +mv DoulosSIL/* . %{__sed} -i 's/\r//' *.txt @@ -59,14 +57,19 @@ %files %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) -%doc FONTLOG.txt FONTLOG-Literacy.txt OFL.txt OFL-FAQ.txt README.txt -%doc DoulosSIL%{version}FontDocumentation.pdf +%doc FONTLOG.txt OFL.txt OFL-FAQ.txt README.txt +%doc DoulosSIL%{docversion}FontDocumentation.pdf %dir %{fontdir} %{fontdir}/*.ttf %changelog +* Tue Jan 13 2009 Roozbeh Pournader - 4.104-1 +- Update main font to 4.104 (with Unicode 5.1 support) +- Remove Doulos Literacy (not maintained anymore) +- Last update before conversion to new fonts policy + * Tue Dec 11 2007 Roozbeh Pournader - 4.100-1 - Update main font to 4.100, keep old Doulos Literacy which is latest - Change license tag to OFL Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/doulos-fonts/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.6 retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.6 -r1.7 --- sources 11 Dec 2007 14:17:36 -0000 1.6 +++ sources 14 Jan 2009 02:04:57 -0000 1.7 @@ -1,2 +1 @@ -0f043d34dd190259b64d57a501173c92 DoulosSIL4.100.zip -c7cac6597ed75f4df89a9579a5d0e419 DoulosSILLit4.0.14.r1.zip +b11373034e7e417b6e00b394c8da7f67 DoulosSIL4.104.zip From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 03:01:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:01:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462041] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140301.n0E31W8U017200@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462041 Bug 462041 depends on bug 462038, which changed state. Bug 462038 Summary: Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 03:01:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:01:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462038] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140301.n0E31UUG017161@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 Roozbeh Pournader changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #15 from Roozbeh Pournader 2009-01-13 22:01:27 EDT --- The problem seems to still exist with latest fontforge in F10 (fontforge-20080828-1.fc10). I have it and it makes fontforge totally unusable. I build an RPM for myself based on devel, removing the libspiro dependency, and everything worked fine (with a nicer font for the UI). Kevin, would you consider pushing the devel version to F10? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 14 04:48:08 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:48:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/cjkunifonts/devel cjkunifonts.spec,1.29,1.30 Message-ID: <20090114044808.777D070136@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv6413 Modified Files: cjkunifonts.spec Log Message: * Wed Jan 14 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-13.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 - Included _font_pkg macro to conform new font packaging guidelines. - Tidy up .spec file. Index: cjkunifonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/cjkunifonts/devel/cjkunifonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.29 retrieving revision 1.30 diff -u -r1.29 -r1.30 --- cjkunifonts.spec 8 Jan 2009 07:00:44 -0000 1.29 +++ cjkunifonts.spec 14 Jan 2009 04:47:38 -0000 1.30 @@ -1,21 +1,20 @@ %define fontname cjkunifonts -%define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} -%define archivename %{name}-%{version} %define common_desc \ -Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from the original fonts generously made \available by Arphic Technology under the "Arphic Public License" and extended \ -by the CJK Unifonts project. +Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts derived from original fonts made available by \ +Arphic Technology under "Arphic Public License" and extended by the CJK \ +Unifonts project. -%define umingbuilddir ../%{name}-uming-%{version} -%define ukaibuilddir ../%{name}-ukai-%{version} -%define umingfontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-uming -%define ukaifontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name}-ukai -%define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d +%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{name} +%define gsdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d %define catalogue %{_sysconfdir}/X11/fontpath.d +%define umingbuilddir %{name}-uming-%{version} +%define ukaibuilddir %{name}-ukai-%{version} + Name: %{fontname} Version: 0.2.20080216.1 -Release: 12%{?dist} -Summary: Chinese TrueType Fonts -- Simplified and Traditional Chinese Ming and Kai Face +Release: 13%{?dist} +Summary: Chinese Unicode TrueType fonts in Ming and Kai face. License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X URL: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/CJKUnifonts @@ -38,7 +37,7 @@ %common_desc %package uming -Summary: Chinese Uming style face TrueType Font +Summary: Chinese Unicode TrueType font in Ming face. License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem @@ -49,11 +48,36 @@ %description uming %common_desc -Chinese Uming style face TrueType Font derived from the original fonts released -by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. +Ming face Chinese Unicode TrueType font derived from the original fonts \ +released by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. + +%_font_pkg -n uming -f *-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf uming.ttc + +# remaining uming files +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/license +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ShanHeiSun_UMing.odt +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ShanHeiSun_UMing.pdf +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/FONTLOG +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/INSTALL +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/KNOWN_ISSUES +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/NEWS +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/README +%doc ../%{umingbuilddir}/TODO +%{gsdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN +%{gsdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN +%{gsdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf +%{catalogue}/%{name} %package ukai -Summary: Chinese Ukai style face TrueType font +Summary: Chinese Unicode TrueType font in Kai face. License: Arphic Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem @@ -64,162 +88,102 @@ %description ukai %common_desc -Chinese Ukai style face TrueType Font derived from the original fonts released -by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. +Kai face Chinese Unicode TrueType font derived from the original fonts \ +released by Arphic Technology and extended by the CJK Unifonts project. + +%_font_pkg -n ukai -f *-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf ukai.ttc + +# remaining ukai files +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/license +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ZenKai_UKai.odt +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ZenKai_UKai.pdf +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/FONTLOG +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/INSTALL +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/KNOWN_ISSUES +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/NEWS +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/README +%doc ../%{ukaibuilddir}/TODO +%{gsdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN +%{gsdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN +%{gsdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW +%{gsdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%{catalogue}/%{name} %prep -%setup -q -c -T -a1 -n %{name}-uming-%{version} +%setup -q -c -T -a1 -n %{umingbuilddir} %patch1 -p1 -b .1-rhbz466667 -%setup -q -c -T -a2 -n %{name}-ukai-%{version} +%setup -q -c -T -a2 -n %{ukaibuilddir} %build %{nil} %install -rm -rf %{buildroot} +%__rm -rf %{buildroot} -# dirs -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} - -# ttfs -install -m 0644 %{umingbuilddir}/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{ukaibuilddir}/ukai.ttc %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir}/ +# *.ttc(ttf) +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir} +%__install -m 0644 ../%{umingbuilddir}/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{fontdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 ../%{ukaibuilddir}/ukai.ttc %{buildroot}%{fontdir}/ # fonts.{scale,dir} -%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} -o %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir}/fonts.scale -mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{umingfontdir} -%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} -o %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir}/fonts.scale -mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{ukaifontdir} - -# fontconfig config files -install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} - -cd %{umingbuilddir} +%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir} \ + -o %{buildroot}%{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%{_bindir}/mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{fontdir} + +# *.conf +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} +cd ../%{umingbuilddir} for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - cd %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/ && \ - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf $fconf && \ - cd - + %__install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ + %__ln_s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done -cd %{ukaibuilddir} +cd ../%{ukaibuilddir} for fconf in `ls *-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf` do - install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - cd %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/ && \ - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf $fconf && \ - cd - + %__install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ + %__ln_s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done cd - -# backward compat -install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType -install -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType -%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf -%{__ln_s} ../../%{name}-uming/uming.ttc %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf - -# catalogue -%{__ln_s} %{umingfontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-uming -%{__ln_s} %{ukaifontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai +# backward compat to obsoleted ttf +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType +%__ln_s ../../%{name}/uming.ttc \ + %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf +%__ln_s ../../%{name}/uming.ttc \ + %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf # ghostscript -install -d %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir} -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE3} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE4} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE5} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE6} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE7} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -m 0644 %{SOURCE8} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ - -%clean -rm -fr ${buildroot} +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{gsdir} +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE3} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE4} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE5} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE6} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE7} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -m 0644 %{SOURCE8} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ -%post uming -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{umingfontdir} -fi - -%post ukai -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{ukaifontdir} -fi - -%postun uming -if [ "$1" = 0 ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{_datadir}/fonts - fi -fi - -%postun ukai -if [ "$1" = 0 ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{_datadir}/fonts - fi -fi - -%files uming -%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/license -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ShanHeiSun_UMing.odt -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ShanHeiSun_UMing.pdf -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/FONTLOG -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/INSTALL -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/KNOWN_ISSUES -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/NEWS -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/README -%doc %{umingbuilddir}/TODO -%dir %{umingfontdir} -%dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN -%dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW -%dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType -%dir %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType -%{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN -%{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN -%{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN -%{umingfontdir}/*.ttc -%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_fontconfig_confdir}/*-ttf-arphic-uming*.conf -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{umingfontdir}/fonts.dir -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{umingfontdir}/fonts.scale -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_CN/TrueType/zysong.ttf -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_datadir}/fonts/zh_TW/TrueType/bsmi00lp.ttf -%{catalogue}/%{name}-uming +# catalogue +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +%__ln_s %{fontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name} -%files ukai -%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/license -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/CONTRIBUTERS -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ZenKai_UKai.odt -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/Font_Comparison_ZenKai_UKai.pdf -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/FONTLOG -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/INSTALL -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/KNOWN_ISSUES -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/NEWS -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/README -%doc %{ukaibuilddir}/TODO -%dir %{ukaifontdir} -%{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/FAPIcidfmap.zh_CN -%{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/cidfmap.zh_CN -%{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_TW -%{cidmapdir}/CIDFnmap.zh_CN -%{ukaifontdir}/*.ttc -%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_fontconfig_confdir}/*-ttf-arphic-ukai*.conf -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{ukaifontdir}/fonts.dir -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{ukaifontdir}/fonts.scale -%{catalogue}/%{name}-ukai +%clean +%__rm -fr ${buildroot} %changelog +* Wed Jan 14 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-13.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477373 +- Included _font_pkg macro to conform new font packaging guidelines. +- Tidy up .spec file. + * Tue Jan 06 2009 Caius Chance - 0.2.20080216.1-12.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477373 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 04:51:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:51:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462038] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140451.n0E4prWc006369@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-13 23:51:53 EDT --- > Kevin, would you consider pushing the devel version to F10? Well, we have talked about doing that in the past, but we need to be very carefull. fontforge is used to build a number of fonts, so we need to make sure the version we push as an update will work to build all the fonts that use it to build in F-10. Otherwise they could be in a bad place if they need to update. Perhaps we could coordinate such a move on the fonts-sig list? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 05:21:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:21:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 471538] FontForge Abort Opening some .otf files In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140521.n0E5Lmnf011795@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471538 --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-14 00:21:41 EDT --- I'm going to go ahead and close this now, as the indicated build appears to fix things. Feel free to reopen if it's not working for you... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 05:38:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 00:38:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 471538] FontForge Abort Opening some .otf files In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140538.n0E5cPg7014581@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471538 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 06:12:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:12:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 428427] [kn_IN][fonts-indic] - 0CB5+0CCA is wrongly rendering In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140612.n0E6CSCY020900@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428427 --- Comment #8 from Shankar Prasad 2009-01-14 01:12:26 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=328952) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328952) Screenshot of current and correct rendering Rahul, The above said rendering is there in Lohit-Kannada also. You can have look at the screen shot attached Shankar -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 06:33:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:33:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140633.n0E6XHeM024348@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477373, which changed state. Bug 477373 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 06:33:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:33:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477373] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140633.n0E6XGfG024313@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477373 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #9 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-14 01:33:15 EDT --- built w/ macro used http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=78415 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 07:02:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:02:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140702.n0E728OR021172@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #7 from san 2009-01-14 02:02:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > Hi, could I ask which part of the glyph you feel is ugly? Personally I feel 'R' > looks similar as other characters. please take a look for web sshot I committed (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=325770) in which Letter "R" is marked with red color. the last stroke of "R" is gray not the same black as other strokes. I enable slight hinting for Liberation Sans. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 14 07:40:58 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis Message-ID: <20090114074058.3B1481F8262@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 14 07:40:58 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-cm-lgc Message-ID: <20090114074058.143821F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-cm-lgc has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On x86_64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On i386: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On ppc64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 09:14:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:14:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140914.n0E9EFEQ014787@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #12 from Sarantis Paskalis 2009-01-14 04:14:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > After a mail exchange with Tom the new naming rules will probably look like > that > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) > > As your package is one of the most complex naming-wise please check you're ok > with the proposal (or suggest amendments) I am ok with most of the proposal. I have some doubts about the TeX-related subpackage. One is whether tex should be a prefix or a suffix. The other is whether the foundry name (ctan) should be in the package name. After all, we do not name all the perl modules perl-cpan-perlmodule. But I guess this is not so critical, can be left unspecified (it is after all a TeX related subpackage) and wait for some input from the TeX guys. (My preference would be that tex should be a prefix and the ctan deleted as in tex-cm-lgc). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 09:30:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:30:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140930.n0E9Ux8a018901@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #13 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 04:30:58 EDT --- The "ctan" bit is to be consistent with the other "foundry" prefixes. For the TEX part, since it's unlikely to be the only tex subpackage a suffix will be a lot easier to manage for you I think. But anyway please agree with other TEX guys on a naming convention there. Once the fonts naming proposal is officialized this naming example will be part of guidelines and much harder to change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 09:57:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:57:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462038] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901140957.n0E9vpme001140@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 --- Comment #17 from Jens Petersen 2009-01-14 04:57:50 EDT --- I agree with Kevin: while the problem sounds annoying it is probably safest not to update the fontforge version unless necessary. But by all means discuss on fedora-fonts-list - it would be good to have a firm policy on this. Font developers can hopefully use the build from rawhide in the meantime until F11 is released. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 15:41:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:41:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474514] file conflict on upgrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141541.n0EFfnVE019213@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474514 James Antill changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #6 from James Antill 2009-01-14 10:41:48 EDT --- Can you test with the 3.2.21 yum, and see what happens? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477368] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaeOk013948@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477368 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:38 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477413] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbNmJ014659@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477413 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:22 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477392] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIav5g014229@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:57 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477464] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc61T015452@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477464 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:05 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477404] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb9pp014409@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477404 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:08 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477394] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb0wg014262@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477394 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:59 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477472] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcDAi015584@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477472 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:12 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477471] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcCRM015559@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477471 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:11 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477382] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIammP014075@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477382 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:47 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477390] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIauBO014211@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477390 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:55 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477487] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcPvi015821@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477487 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:24 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477372] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIahW7013993@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477372 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:42 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477477] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcJjG015706@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477477 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:18 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477480] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcLus015744@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477480 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:20 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:44 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:44 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477439] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbiQs015041@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477439 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:43 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477483] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcNll015786@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477483 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:22 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477424] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbXdI014852@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477424 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:32 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477441] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbkld015076@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477441 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:46 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477450] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbuDN015259@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477450 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:55 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477397] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb2Yn014302@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477397 --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:01 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477442] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIblVs015098@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477442 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:47 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477371] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIageN013969@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477371 --- Comment #11 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:40 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477335] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaaAR013889@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477335 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:35 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477448] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbswU015224@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477448 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:53 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477337] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIacl8013926@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477337 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:37 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477444] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIboPH015136@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477444 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:49 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477336] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIab01013910@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477336 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:36 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477463] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc5ad015430@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477463 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:04 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:35 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477427] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbZXW014900@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477427 --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:34 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477481] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcMWf015765@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477481 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:21 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477419] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbQSC014722@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477419 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:25 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477420] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbS97014753@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477420 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:27 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477421] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbTWF014782@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477421 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:28 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477400] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb52m014337@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477400 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:04 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477405] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbBtZ014432@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477405 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:10 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477474] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcGJE015631@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477474 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:15 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477473] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcE5v015607@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477473 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:13 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477393] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaxOK014245@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477393 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:58 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477386] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaqBP014135@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477386 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:51 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477475] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcHxm015667@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477475 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:16 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477375] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIak6x014038@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477375 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:45 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477378] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIalpT014061@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477378 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:46 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477403] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb8YY014382@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477403 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:07 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477408] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbHrE014556@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477408 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:16 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477374] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIajKk014017@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477374 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:44 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477436] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbeam014968@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477436 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:39 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477331] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaU4b013764@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477331 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:28 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477437] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbgA3014989@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477437 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:41 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477383] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIanHh014096@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477383 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:48 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:07 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477401] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb7QJ014363@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477401 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:06 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477443] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbmhE015114@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477443 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:48 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477333] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaXmg013859@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477333 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:33 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477459] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc15T015374@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477459 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:00 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcScn015861@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:27 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477468] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcB2M015539@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:10 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477438] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbhbY015015@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477438 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:42 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477446] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbqho015176@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477446 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:51 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477457] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbxbJ015325@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477457 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:58 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477398] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb43I014324@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477398 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:03 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477476] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcI1W015689@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477476 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:17 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477453] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbwGS015306@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477453 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:57 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477447] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbrTx015194@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477447 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:52 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477486] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcOnK015807@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477486 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:23 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477458] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc040015349@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477458 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:59 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477389] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIat27014198@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477389 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:54 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477479] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcKNx015727@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477479 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:19 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:31 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:31 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477422] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbVlW014807@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477422 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:30 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477445] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbppN015154@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477445 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:50 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477406] kdeedu: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbE18014479@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477406 --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:11 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477395] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIb1l6014278@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477395 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:00 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477449] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbtTw015241@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477449 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:54 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:07 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477465] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc7or015474@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477465 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:06 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:39 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477432] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbdjT014947@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477432 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:38 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477412] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbM38014642@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477412 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:21 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477451] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbvc6015275@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477451 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:56 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbOZx014675@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #9 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:23 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477467] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc9MR015518@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477467 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:08 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477429] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbbIt014917@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477429 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:36 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477387] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIasZs014163@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477387 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:53 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477411] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbKT0014619@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477411 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:20 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477431] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbckj014934@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477431 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:37 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477334] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaYaT013876@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477334 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:34 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477466] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc8nn015500@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477466 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:07 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477488] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIcQGN015839@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477488 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:26 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477410] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbJeP014597@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477410 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:19 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477418] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbPV5014696@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477418 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:24 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:34 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:34 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477426] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbY6F014869@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477426 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:33 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477462] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc4WB015413@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477462 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:03 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477385] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIap5k014116@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477385 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:50 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477440] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbjHE015059@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477440 --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:44 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:36:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:36:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477332] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141836.n0EIaWVH013817@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477332 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:36:31 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477423] mathml-fonts: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbWMu014833@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477423 --- Comment #3 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:31 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477409] koffice: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbI3f014576@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477409 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:17 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:37:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:37:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477407] kdelibs: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141837.n0EIbFWV014520@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477407 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:37:14 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 18:38:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:38:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141838.n0EIc2Ui015388@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #14 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 13:38:01 EDT --- FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: ? 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 ? 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 19:30:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:30:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 475661] Review Request: google-droid-fonts - The Droid font set In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141930.n0EJUMbw001874@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475661 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |oget.fedora at gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |oget.fedora at gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review+ Bug 475661 depends on bug 475593, which changed state. Bug 475593 Summary: Review Request: fontpackages - Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475593 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #1 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2009-01-14 14:30:21 EDT --- I poked around this package for 2 hours now. I couldn't find any blockers. There are two minor things I think I should say: * Not a blocker but, as I say in all my reviews, I prefer using %defattr(-,root,root,-) * All fonts (including sans-serif ones) say that they are "Serif" as (OS/2) PFM-Family in fontforge. I think upstream needs notified. Other than these two, you might want to wait for the subpackage naming decision of FESCO for http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) Otherwise, everything is clean ----------------------------------------------------- This package (google-droid-fonts) is APPROVED by oget ----------------------------------------------------- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 19:32:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:32:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477392] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901141932.n0EJWwAt027344@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 --- Comment #7 from Tim Fenn 2009-01-14 14:32:57 EDT --- 1.0.4-13 in rawhide drops the doxygen included font files, and instead just uses the html in the docs. ok to close? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 20:18:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:18:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477392] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142018.n0EKIx5T003517@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 15:18:58 EDT --- I you don't have any font files in your package anymore you can close the bug -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 20:30:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:30:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477392] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142030.n0EKUuo4021139@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 Tim Fenn changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 20:30:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:30:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142030.n0EKUvGt021175@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477392, which changed state. Bug 477392 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477392 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 21:53:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:53:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 475661] Review Request: google-droid-fonts - General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142153.n0ELrcZg022271@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475661 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |google-droid-fonts - The |google-droid-fonts - |Droid font set |General-purpose fonts | |released by Google as part | |of Android Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-14 16:53:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > I poked around this package for 2 hours now. I couldn't find any blockers. > There are two minor things I think I should say: > > * Not a blocker but, as I say in all my reviews, I prefer using > %defattr(-,root,root,-) For fonts an explicit defattr is part of the guidelines since there is no reason to have fonts with strange permissions installed :p > * All fonts (including sans-serif ones) say that they are "Serif" as (OS/2) > PFM-Family in fontforge. I think upstream needs notified. Missed this, nice to know, will do > Other than these two, you might want to wait for the subpackage naming decision > of FESCO for > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) Since the changes FPC requested didn't affect srpm naming, I'll do the cvs request now. > ----------------------------------------------------- > This package (google-droid-fonts) is APPROVED by oget > ----------------------------------------------------- Thank you! New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: google-droid-fonts Short Description: General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android Owners: nim Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: fonts-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 22:22:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:22:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142222.n0EMMGJ7027934@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477438, which changed state. Bug 477438 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477438 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 22:22:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:22:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477438] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142222.n0EMME53027905@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477438 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-14 17:22:14 EDT --- This package had a copy of Dustismo in it, but there's no need for it to package the font. It uses the local copy for build testing (to ensure TTF support works), but the Dustismo fonts are packaged separately. Fixed in perl-GDTextUtil-0.86-12.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 23:01:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477371] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142301.n0EN1MAD002141@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477371 --- Comment #12 from Victor Bogado 2009-01-14 18:01:21 EDT --- The font package naming says the package name must end in "fonts" (plural) does this stay true even for packages that contain only one font without any variations? I made a new version of the spec file could you take a look? http://bogado.net/rpm/cave9.spec http://bogado.net/rpm/cave9-0.3-5.bog10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 23:36:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:36:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142336.n0ENaACS008928@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 --- Comment #4 from Qianqian Fang 2009-01-14 18:36:09 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329052) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329052) updated spec file for wqy-zenhei-fonts Let me know if this file makes sense to you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Wed Jan 14 23:35:06 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:35:06 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901142335.n0ENZ61k008714@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 --- Comment #3 from Qianqian Fang 2009-01-14 18:35:05 EDT --- sorry for my delay in responding to this upgrade. I used to build all the packages from a FC6 machine, and it took me a while to set up everything on a F10 virtual machine. Now everything seems to be working fine. I have a problem to compile my package (for example, wqy-zenhei-fonts) with the new spec file (attached later): "make i386" complains about missing "wqy-zenhei-fonts-0.8.34" folder, which I assume it is the definition of %{_fontdir}, right? the upstream src file only extract a wqy-zenhei folder, as other font packages from wqy. they are not named based on fedora font packages. What do you suggest me to do to get around this? thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nim at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 00:21:22 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:21:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontpackages/devel .cvsignore, 1.4, 1.5 fontpackages.spec, 1.4, 1.5 import.log, 1.4, 1.5 sources, 1.4, 1.5 Message-ID: <20090115002122.3D5E57012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1253/devel Modified Files: .cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources Log Message: 1.14 Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- .cvsignore 22 Dec 2008 12:31:30 -0000 1.4 +++ .cvsignore 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 @@ -1 +1 @@ -fontpackages-1.13.tar.bz2 +fontpackages-1.14.tar.bz2 Index: fontpackages.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/fontpackages.spec,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- fontpackages.spec 22 Dec 2008 12:31:30 -0000 1.4 +++ fontpackages.spec 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ %define rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/ Name: fontpackages -Version: 1.13 +Version: 1.14 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages @@ -97,26 +97,34 @@ %changelog +* Wed Jan 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.13-1 +??? Update for subpackage naming changes requested by FPC + * Mon Dec 22 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.13-1 ??? Add another directory to avoid depending on unowned stuff ??? use it to put the fontconfig examples in a better place + * Sun Dec 21 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.12-2 ??? Change homepage + * Fri Dec 19 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.12-1 ??? Add another macro to allow building fontconfig without cycling + * Wed Dec 10 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.11-1 ??? Add actual fedorahosted references + * Sun Nov 23 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.10-1 ??? renamed to ???fontpackages??? + * Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.9-1 ??? fix and complete fontconfig doc -* Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.8-1 ??? simplify multi spec template: codify general case - 1.7-1 Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- import.log 22 Dec 2008 12:31:30 -0000 1.4 +++ import.log 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 @@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ fontpackages-1_12-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.12-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229726060 fontpackages-1_12-2_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.12-2.fc11.src.rpm:1229863050 fontpackages-1_13-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.13-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229949018 +fontpackages-1_14-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.14-1.fc11.src.rpm:1231978787 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- sources 22 Dec 2008 12:31:30 -0000 1.4 +++ sources 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 @@ -1 +1 @@ -8d7eb82ee9fafc3f0826da58b9bb537f fontpackages-1.13.tar.bz2 +a90a6bbc2937c847fb32cad0bac41726 fontpackages-1.14.tar.bz2 From nim at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 00:28:42 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel bitstream-vera-fonts.spec, 1.10, 1.11 import.log, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090115002842.9F80F7012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2084/devel Modified Files: bitstream-vera-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: Update for new FPC naming rules Index: bitstream-vera-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/bitstream-vera-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.10 retrieving revision 1.11 diff -u -r1.10 -r1.11 --- bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 17 Dec 2008 19:15:19 -0000 1.10 +++ bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 00:28:12 -0000 1.11 @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 1.10 -Release: 12%{?dist} +Release: 13%{?dist} Summary: Bitstream Vera fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ Group: User Interface/X Obsoletes: bitstream-vera-fonts < 1.10-9 -Requires: %{name}-sans, %{name}-serif, %{name}-sans-mono +Requires: %{fontname}-sans-fonts, %{fontname}-serif-fonts, %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts %description compat This package only exists to help transition pre 1.10-9 Bitstream Vera users to @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ %package common -Summary: Bitstream Vera, common files (documentation???) +Summary: Common files of the Bitstream Vera font set Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem @@ -49,12 +49,14 @@ This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. -%package sans -Summary: Bitstream Vera, variable-width sans-serif font faces +%package -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts +Summary: Variable-width sans-serif Bitstream Vera fonts Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} -%description sans +Obsoletes: %{name}-sans < 1.10-13 + +%description -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the Bitstream Vera sans-serif variable-width font @@ -63,12 +65,14 @@ %_font_pkg -n sans Vera.ttf VeraBd.ttf VeraIt.ttf VeraBI.ttf -%package serif -Summary: Bitstream Vera, variable-width serif font faces +%package -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts +Summary: Variable-width serif Bitstream Vera fonts Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} -%description serif +Obsoletes: %{name}-serif < 1.10-13 + +%description -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the Bitstream Vera serif variable-width font faces. @@ -76,12 +80,14 @@ %_font_pkg -n serif VeraSe*ttf -%package sans-mono -Summary: Bitstream Vera, monospace sans-serif font faces +%package -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts +Summary: Monospace sans-serif Bitstream Vera fonts Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} -%description sans-mono +Obsoletes: %{name}-sans-mono < 1.10-13 + +%description -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the Bitstream Vera sans-serif monospace font faces. Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:15:19 -0000 1.1 +++ import.log 15 Jan 2009 00:28:12 -0000 1.2 @@ -1 +1,2 @@ bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-12_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-12.fc11.src.rpm:1229541266 +bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-13_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-13.fc11.src.rpm:1231979242 From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 02:11:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:11:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474514] file conflict on upgrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150211.n0F2BePG016434@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474514 Akira TAGOH changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #7 from Akira TAGOH 2009-01-14 21:11:38 EDT --- That works fine now. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 02:50:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-cartoon-fonts - Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150250.n0F2obLN006859@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-14 21:50:36 EDT --- serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 02:50:40 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 479596] Review Request: serafettin-cartoon-fonts - Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150250.n0F2oe85022536@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479596 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 03:01:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:01:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150301.n0F319no010661@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-14 22:01:07 EDT --- jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 03:03:13 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:03:13 -0500 Subject: [Bug 471103] Font spacing wrong in menus and text In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150303.n0F33D0q011603@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471103 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-14 22:03:12 EDT --- openoffice.org-2.4.2-18.3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 03:06:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:06:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150306.n0F3689k012545@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 03:03:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:03:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 471103] Font spacing wrong in menus and text In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150303.n0F33GJ1011631@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471103 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 03:05:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:05:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477402] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150305.n0F35vwe028385@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477402 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-14 22:05:57 EDT --- jack-audio-connection-kit-0.116.1-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 07:33:36 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:33:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis Message-ID: <20090115073336.E87EE1F8261@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 07:33:38 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:33:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-cm-lgc Message-ID: <20090115073338.61DCD1F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-cm-lgc has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On x86_64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On i386: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On ppc64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 08:21:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:21:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477371] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150821.n0F8LxbK007311@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477371 --- Comment #13 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-15 03:21:58 EDT --- To quote the new naming guideline "The use of the -fonts suffix is not dependant on the actual number of font files in the package." Also I had to change the templates and macros slightly to take into account the naming changes requested by FPC, so before it hits stable releases please use "fontpackages-*-1.14" from rawhide to test your specs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 08:28:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:28:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 478891] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150828.n0F8Sp52008355@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478891 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-15 03:28:50 EDT --- np, there are lots of packagers which have not started working on it yer 1. You do not need the %{_fontdir}/*.ttc line in %files 2. Do you actually need to declare the fonts in the legacy core fonts X11 system? If it's not 100% necessary life will be simpler without the fonts.scale bit 3. If you install multiple fontconfig file you must find an expression rpm accepts that can be used as argument to the -f call to %{fontconf} (generaly, using ?? or other rpm wildcards) Also please test with "fontpackages-*-1.14" from rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 08:31:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:31:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477461] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901150831.n0F8V830025211@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477461 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-15 03:31:06 EDT --- The "fontpackages-*-1.14" packages from rawhide (templates and macros) should enable you to respect the new naming easily (feel free to name the tex subpackage as you want) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From hdu at openoffice.org Thu Jan 15 09:08:41 2009 From: hdu at openoffice.org (hdu at openoffice.org) Date: 15 Jan 2009 09:08:41 -0000 Subject: [Issue 96826] Add font autoinstallation support In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090115090841.8011.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=96826 User hdu changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'fedorafonts' |'fedorafonts,hdu' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed| |1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Additional comments from hdu at openoffice.org Thu Jan 15 09:08:40 +0000 2009 ------- confirmed. I guess thats a task for framework. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 12:37:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:37:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 456527] Review Request: sil-gentium-fonts - Gentium Basic Font Family In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151237.n0FCb3VJ014026@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456527 Rahul Bhalerao changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |gentium-basic-fonts - |sil-gentium-fonts - |Gentium Basic Font Family |Gentium Basic Font Family Flag|needinfo?(rbhalera at redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #15 from Rahul Bhalerao 2009-01-15 07:37:00 EDT --- Here are the updates according to new font packaging guidelines: SPEC URL: http://rbhalera.fedorapeople.org/sil-gentium-fonts/sil-gentium-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://rbhalera.fedorapeople.org/sil-gentium-fonts/sil-gentium-fonts-1.1-1.fc11.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 14:58:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:58:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474514] file conflict on upgrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151458.n0FEwIkD016595@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474514 James Antill changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 17:16:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:16:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151716.n0FHGXIA019155@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-15 12:16:32 EDT --- Trying to implement this using freecol as an example, running into build errors: RPM build errors: File must begin with "/": %_font_pkg File must begin with "/": -n File must begin with "/": aybabtu-fonts File must begin with "/": lilypond/2.12.1/fonts/otf/aybabtu.otf File must begin with "/": %_font_pkg File must begin with "/": -n File must begin with "/": centuryschl-fonts File must begin with "/": lilypond/2.12.1/fonts/otf/CenturySchL*otf File must begin with "/": %_font_pkg File must begin with "/": -n File must begin with "/": emmentaler-fonts File must begin with "/": lilypond/2.12.1/fonts/otf/emmentaler*otf File must begin with "/": %_font_pkg File must begin with "/": -n File must begin with "/": feta-fonts File must begin with "/": lilypond/2.12.1/fonts/source/feta*mf Attaching current spec. Am I missing something obvious? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 17:16:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:16:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151716.n0FHGvIm003407@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla 2009-01-15 12:16:56 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329111) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329111) Spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 17:20:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151720.n0FHKBD5004255@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477441, which changed state. Bug 477441 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477441 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution| |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 17:20:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:20:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477441] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151720.n0FHKA7T004229@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477441 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-15 12:20:09 EDT --- The tex docs generation was pulling in FreeSans, although, I don't know from where, as I didn't have freefont installed, and it doesn't come with the Physfs tarball. Nevertheless, there is no good reason to package the tex docs (and font) when the html docs are just fine. Fixed in rawhide (physfs-1.0.1-9.fc11). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 18:02:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:02:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477468] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151802.n0FI22UX029699@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-15 13:02:00 EDT --- So, given the naming scheme: "Fedora font packages are named [foundryname-][projectname-]fontfamilyname-fonts, in lowercase." The foundryname is "tiresias". The projectname is "tiresias". Upstream thinks that the familyname is "tiresias", but there are arguably five font families here: "infofont" "keyfont" "lpfont" "pcfont" "signfont" Since the naming guidelines say "When foundryname, projectname or fontfamilyname contain the font or fonts affix, it should be skipped to avoid foofont-fonts packages." This means that I should skip the fontfamilyname as well. This leaves me with "tiresias-fonts", which is the current naming and packaging structure. Now, I could do: tiresias-info-fonts tiresias-key-fonts tiresias-lp-fonts tiresias-pc-fonts tiresias-sign-fonts But that would not be accurate. Please advise as to what I should do in this scenario. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 18:22:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:22:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477416] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151822.n0FIMQUJ001121@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-15 13:22:25 EDT --- 1. You need to install your otf files in %{_fontdir} (you can keep the mf ones) install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} 2. Replace your %_font_pkg calls like %_font_pkg -n centuryschl-fonts lilypond/%{version}/fonts/otf/CenturySchL*otf by %_font_pkg -n centuryschl CenturySchL*otf (are the fonts really named centuryschl BTW?) 3. create a -fonts-common subpackage that will own %{_fontdir} %files fonts-common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc %dir %{_fontdir} 4. make sure you use the fontpackages version in rawhide http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=78561 5. and probably add symlinks to your main package so your app still sees the otf files in the place it's used to -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 18:52:54 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:52:54 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477468] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151852.n0FIqsDJ023813@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-15 13:52:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > So, given the naming scheme: > > "Fedora font packages are named > [foundryname-][projectname-]fontfamilyname-fonts, in lowercase." > > The foundryname is "tiresias". The projectname is "tiresias". Right. So your font package names should be tiresias-fontfamilyname-fonts instead of tiresias-tiresias-fontfamilyname-fonts > Upstream thinks that the familyname is "tiresias", but there are arguably five > font families here: > "infofont" > "keyfont" > "lpfont" > "pcfont" > "signfont" Actually, it isn't the font family. I haven't repeated the definition of font family in the naming section, because it should already be introduced by the splitting rule submitted and approved before. But to repeat it from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_(2008-12-21) ? What is a font family? * A font family corresponds to one entry in GUI font lists. For example, DejaVu Sans, DejaVu Serif and DejaVu Sans Mono are three different font families. * A font family is subdivided in faces or styles. DejaVu Sans Normal, DejaVu Sans Bold, DejaVu Sans Condensed Italic are three faces of the DejaVu Sans font family. * The gnome-font-viewer command can be used to check the font family name and the font face/style declared by a font file.? Using the gnome-font-viewer command for example you'll see the infofont fonts declare the "Tiresias Infofont" and "Tiresias Infofont Z" (so you have two different families in this archive) for the first font set, you would get tiresias-fontfamilyname-fonts ? tiresias-tiresias-infofont-fonts That should obviously normalise to tiresias-infofont-fonts, except I need to rework the wording a bit > Since the naming guidelines say "When foundryname, projectname or > fontfamilyname contain the font or fonts affix, it should be skipped to avoid > foofont-fonts packages." This should say "the affix should be skipped" instead of "it should be skipped" I didn't thought one could read it like you did tiresias-infofont-fonts ? tiresias-info-fonts So the guidelines more or less work, and produce about the same naming as you proposed, except I need to rework some little points to avoid misinterpretations I've updated the guideline proposal with some clarifications -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From behdad at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 19:06:47 2009 From: behdad at fedoraproject.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:06:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/freetype/devel .cvsignore, 1.20, 1.21 freetype.spec, 1.66, 1.67 sources, 1.20, 1.21 Message-ID: <20090115190647.CFF437012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: behdad Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/freetype/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv28447 Modified Files: .cvsignore freetype.spec sources Log Message: * Thu Jan 15 2009 Behdad Esfahbod 2.3.8-1 - Update to 2.3.8 - Remove freetype-autohinter-ligature.patch Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/freetype/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.20 retrieving revision 1.21 diff -u -r1.20 -r1.21 --- .cvsignore 14 Aug 2008 15:41:06 -0000 1.20 +++ .cvsignore 15 Jan 2009 19:06:17 -0000 1.21 @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ -freetype-2.3.7.tar.bz2 -freetype-doc-2.3.7.tar.bz2 -ft2demos-2.3.7.tar.bz2 +freetype-2.3.8.tar.bz2 +freetype-doc-2.3.8.tar.bz2 +ft2demos-2.3.8.tar.bz2 Index: freetype.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/freetype/devel/freetype.spec,v retrieving revision 1.66 retrieving revision 1.67 diff -u -r1.66 -r1.67 --- freetype.spec 9 Dec 2008 21:04:45 -0000 1.66 +++ freetype.spec 15 Jan 2009 19:06:17 -0000 1.67 @@ -10,8 +10,8 @@ Summary: A free and portable font rendering engine Name: freetype -Version: 2.3.7 -Release: 3%{?dist} +Version: 2.3.8 +Release: 1%{?dist} License: FTL or GPLv2+ Group: System Environment/Libraries URL: http://www.freetype.org @@ -33,9 +33,6 @@ # Fix crash https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6841 Patch89: freetype-2.2.1-memcpy-fix.patch -# Upstream patches -Patch101: freetype-autohinter-ligature.patch - Buildroot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) BuildRequires: libX11-devel @@ -96,8 +93,6 @@ %patch88 -p1 -b .multilib %patch89 -p1 -b .memcpy -%patch101 -p0 -b .autohinter-ligature - %build %configure --disable-static @@ -224,6 +219,10 @@ %doc docs/tutorial %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Behdad Esfahbod 2.3.8-1 +- Update to 2.3.8 +- Remove freetype-autohinter-ligature.patch + * Tue Dec 09 2008 Behdad Esfahbod 2.3.7-3 - Add full source URL to Source lines. - Add docs to main and devel package. Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/freetype/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.20 retrieving revision 1.21 diff -u -r1.20 -r1.21 --- sources 14 Aug 2008 15:41:06 -0000 1.20 +++ sources 15 Jan 2009 19:06:17 -0000 1.21 @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ -83306194817ebdea554133b4232a34aa freetype-2.3.7.tar.bz2 -2ba135e6a126ed86e9b462167511ced8 freetype-doc-2.3.7.tar.bz2 -cf2cc0d0d4788548556c360c25fbe011 ft2demos-2.3.7.tar.bz2 +6cf31a08826715a0d16ae366da9c7d3b freetype-2.3.8.tar.bz2 +de1cc7cf098e11fba5898efdab1bc23d freetype-doc-2.3.8.tar.bz2 +6582649a8b877ec8d9893a9d834f7ab6 ft2demos-2.3.8.tar.bz2 From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Thu Jan 15 19:11:02 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gucharmap (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:11:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 162370] Print the table! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090115191102.1AE8123F503@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370 gucharmap | general | Ver: 1.4.x Behdad Esfahbod changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |behdad at gnome.org ------- Comment #5 from Behdad Esfahbod 2009-01-15 19:11 UTC ------- Roozbeh: they need to patent it for your claim to make any sense. That's the mistake Apple made... using copyright to claim ownership on ideas. Of course, Microsoft just took them and the judge agreed that they don't owe Apple anything. -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370. From spot at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 19:14:45 2009 From: spot at fedoraproject.org (Tom Callaway) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:14:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/silkscreen-fonts/devel silkscreen-fonts-expanded-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 silkscreen-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 silkscreen-fonts.spec, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090115191445.A68F57012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: spot Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/silkscreen-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv30655 Modified Files: silkscreen-fonts.spec Added Files: silkscreen-fonts-expanded-fontconfig.conf silkscreen-fonts-fontconfig.conf Log Message: compliance with new font packaging guidelines --- NEW FILE silkscreen-fonts-expanded-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Silkscreen Expanded Silkscreen Expanded sans-serif --- NEW FILE silkscreen-fonts-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Silkscreen Silkscreen sans-serif Index: silkscreen-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/silkscreen-fonts/devel/silkscreen-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- silkscreen-fonts.spec 28 Jan 2008 17:37:42 -0000 1.1 +++ silkscreen-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 19:14:15 -0000 1.2 @@ -1,27 +1,56 @@ %define fontname silkscreen -%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} -%define fontconfdir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d +%define fontconf 60-%{fontname} + +%define common_desc \ +Silkscreen is a four member type family for your Web graphics created by Jason \ +Kottke. Silkscreen is best used in places where extremely small graphical \ +display type is needed. The primary use is for navigational items (nav bars, \ +menus, etc), but it works well wherever small type is needed. In order to \ +preserve the proper spacing and letterforms, Silkscreen should be used at 8pt. \ +multiples (8pt., 16pt., 24pt., etc.) with anti-aliasing turned off. \ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Summary: Silkscreen four member type family Version: 1.0 -Release: 1%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} # License attribution confirmed by author and Open Font Library # http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/jkottke/218 License: OFL Group: User Interface/X Source0: http://www.kottke.org/plus/type/silkscreen/download/silkscreen.tar.gz +Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf +Source2: %{name}-expanded-fontconfig.conf URL: http://www.kottke.org/plus/type/silkscreen/ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) BuildArch: noarch +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description -Silkscreen is a four member type family for your Web graphics created by Jason -Kottke. Silkscreen is best used in places where extremely small graphical -display type is needed. The primary use is for navigational items (nav bars, -menus, etc), but it works well wherever small type is needed. In order to -preserve the proper spacing and letterforms, Silkscreen should be used at 8pt. -multiples (8pt., 16pt., 24pt., etc.) with anti-aliasing turned off. +%common_desc + +%package common +Summary: Common files for Silkscreen fonts (documentation...) +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem + +%description common +%common_desc + +This package consists of files used by other Silkscreen packages. + +%package -n %{fontname}-expanded-fonts +Summary: Expanded Silkscreen font family +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-expanded-fonts +%common_desc + +This font family has a slightly expanded spacing between the letters in +comparison to the normal Silkscreen font family. + +%_font_pkg -n expanded -f %{fontconf}-expanded.conf slkscre*.ttf %prep %setup -q -c -n %{name} @@ -29,31 +58,30 @@ %build %install -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -install -m 0755 -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir} -install -m 0644 -p *.ttf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir} +rm -rf %{buildroot} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-expanded.conf + +for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf %{fontconf}-expanded.conf ; do + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf +done %clean -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -rf %{buildroot} -%post -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%postun -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi +%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf}.conf slkscr.ttf slkscrb.ttf -%files +%files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc readme.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/*.ttf +%dir %{_fontdir} %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Tom "spot" Callaway 1.0-2 +- rework package for new font guidelines + * Tue Dec 11 2007 Tom "spot" Callaway 1.0-1 - Initial package for Fedora From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 19:18:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:18:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151918.n0FJINav028893@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477457, which changed state. Bug 477457 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477457 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 19:18:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:18:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477457] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901151918.n0FJIMkQ028867@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477457 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-15 14:18:21 EDT --- This packages has been updated in rawhide. It now generates: silkscreen-fonts-1.0-2.fc11.src.rpm silkscreen-fonts-1.0-2.fc11.noarch.rpm silkscreen-fonts-common-1.0-2.fc11.noarch.rpm silkscreen-expanded-fonts-1.0-2.fc11.noarch.rpm (there are two font families: Silkscreen and Silkscreen Expanded) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Thu Jan 15 20:00:37 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gucharmap (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 162370] Print the table! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090115200037.EADA123EF65@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370 gucharmap | general | Ver: 1.4.x Roozbeh Pournader changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |luis.villa at gmail.com ------- Comment #6 from Roozbeh Pournader 2009-01-15 20:00 UTC ------- Behdad, IANAL, but this is not an idea. The "idea" part of this is presenting characters in a chart, which everyone is entitled to. But copyright protects the presentation part of what Unicode has done. Random quote from Wikipedia: "Copyright does not cover ideas and information themselves, only the form or manner in which they are expressed." So, if we want to print Unicode character charts with 16 rows and a hex digit on each row and the rest of the character code at top of each column, write the character code under each glyph, and gray-out the area for not-yet-encoded characters, that may be illegal copying. What I suggest is, if we really want to print character charts (as opposed to what Nicolas suggested in bug 561908), we should redesign it. Otherwise, our work could be considered unlicensed derivative work. Still, since GNOME is a member of Unicode, we probably don't want to get on their nerves. We can ask them officially, if you do not object. CC-ing Luis, asking for insight and advice. -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 20:26:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 475661] Review Request: google-droid-fonts - General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901152026.n0FKQoFq032604@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475661 Kevin Fenzi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-15 15:26:50 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From spot at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 20:37:15 2009 From: spot at fedoraproject.org (Tom Callaway) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:37:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/tiresias-fonts/devel tiresias-fonts-info-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-info-z-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-key-v2-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-lp-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-pc-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-pc-z-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-sign-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts-sign-z-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 tiresias-fonts.spec, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090115203715.F101B7012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: spot Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/tiresias-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11081 Modified Files: tiresias-fonts.spec Added Files: tiresias-fonts-info-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-info-z-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-key-v2-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-lp-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-pc-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-pc-z-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-sign-fontconfig.conf tiresias-fonts-sign-z-fontconfig.conf Log Message: convert package to new guidelines --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-info-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Infofont Infofont sans-serif Infofont Z Infofont --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-info-z-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Infofont Z Infofont Z sans-serif Infofont Infofont Z --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-key-v2-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Keyfont V2 Keyfont V2 sans-serif --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-lp-fontconfig.conf --- serif LPfont LPfont serif --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-pc-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif PCfont PCfont sans-serif PCfont Z PCfont --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-pc-z-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif PCfont Z PCfont Z sans-serif PCfont PCfont Z --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-sign-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Signfont Signfont sans-serif Signfont Z Signfont --- NEW FILE tiresias-fonts-sign-z-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Signfont Z Signfont Z sans-serif Signfont Signfont Z Index: tiresias-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/tiresias-fonts/devel/tiresias-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- tiresias-fonts.spec 7 Jan 2008 22:39:39 -0000 1.1 +++ tiresias-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 20:36:45 -0000 1.2 @@ -1,11 +1,17 @@ %define fontname tiresias -%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} -%define fontconfdir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.d +%define fontconf 60-%{fontname}.conf + +%define common_desc \ +The Tiresias family of fonts has been designed for use in multiple environments \ +to help improve legibility, especially for individuals with visual impairment. \ +It includes specialized fonts for information labels, control labels (for key \ +tops), large print publications, computer systems, television subtitling, and \ +signs. Name: %{fontname}-fonts Summary: Low vision fonts Version: 1.0 -Release: 2%{?dist} +Release: 3%{?dist} License: GPLv3+ Group: User Interface/X Source0: http://www.tiresias.org/fonts/infofont.zip @@ -13,16 +19,148 @@ Source2: http://www.tiresias.org/fonts/lpfont.zip Source3: http://www.tiresias.org/fonts/pcfont.zip Source4: http://www.tiresias.org/fonts/signfont.zip +Source5: %{name}-info-fontconfig.conf +Source6: %{name}-info-z-fontconfig.conf +Source7: %{name}-key-v2-fontconfig.conf +Source8: %{name}-lp-fontconfig.conf +Source9: %{name}-pc-fontconfig.conf +Source10: %{name}-pc-z-fontconfig.conf +Source11: %{name}-sign-fontconfig.conf +Source12: %{name}-sign-z-fontconfig.conf URL: http://www.tiresias.org/fonts/ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel BuildArch: noarch %description -The Tiresias family of fonts has been designed for use in multiple environments -to help improve legibility, especially for individuals with visual impairment. -It includes specialized fonts for information labels, control labels (for key -tops), large print publications, computer systems, television subtitling, and -signs. +%common_desc + +%package common +Summary: Common files for Tiresias fonts (documentation...) +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem + +%description common +%common_desc + +This package consists of files used by other Tiresias packages. + +%package -n %{fontname}-info-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for info terminals for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-info-fonts +%common_desc + +The Infofont family is specialized for use in informational labels on public +terminals such as ATMs using large characters. The only difference between the +Infofont and the Infofont Z families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. +In the Infofont family, the zero is _not_ crossed out, which may lead to some +confusion. + +%_font_pkg -n info -f %{fontconf}-infofont.conf "Tiresias*Infofont*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-info-z-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for info terminals for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-info-z-fonts +%common_desc + +The Infofont Z family is specialized for use in informational labels on public +terminals such as ATMs using large characters. The only difference between the +Infofont Z and the Infofont families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. +In the Infofont Z family, the zero is crossed out. + +%_font_pkg -n info-z -f %{fontconf}-infofont-z.conf "TIRESIAS*INFOFONTZ*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-key-v2-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for labeling keycaps for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-key-v2-fonts +%common_desc + +The Keyfont V2 family is specialized for use in labeling keycaps. + +%_font_pkg -n key-v2 -f %{fontconf}-keyfont-v2.conf "TIREKV__.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-lp-fonts +Summary: Specialized font for large print publications +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-lp-fonts +%common_desc + +The LPfont family is specialized for use in large print publications. + +%_font_pkg -n lp -f %{fontconf}-lpfont.conf "Tiresias*LPfont*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-pc-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for use on PCs for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-pc-fonts +%common_desc + +The PCfont family is specialized for people with poor vision to use on PC +screens using large characters. The only difference between the PCfont and +the PCfont Z families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. In the +PCfont family, the zero is _not_ crossed out, which may lead to some +confusion. + +%_font_pkg -n pc -f %{fontconf}-pcfont.conf "Tiresias*PCfont*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-pc-z-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for use on PCs for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-pc-z-fonts +%common_desc + +The PCfont family is specialized for people with poor vision to use on PC +screens using large characters. The only difference between the PCfont and +the PCfont Z families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. In the +PCfont Z family, the zero is crossed out. + +%_font_pkg -n pc-z -f %{fontconf}-pcfont-z.conf "TIRESIAS*PCFONTZ*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-sign-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for preparing signs for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-sign-fonts +%common_desc + +The Signfont family is specialized for preparing signs for the visually +impaired, using large characters. The only difference between the Signfont and +the Signfont Z families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. In the +Signfont family, the zero is _not_ crossed out, which may lead to some +confusion. + +%_font_pkg -n sign -f %{fontconf}-signfont.conf "Tiresias*Signfont*.ttf" + +%package -n %{fontname}-sign-z-fonts +Summary: Specialized fonts for preparing signs for the visually impaired +Group: User Interface/X +Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-sign-z-fonts +%common_desc + +The Signfont family is specialized for preparing signs for the visually +impaired, using large characters. The only difference between the Signfont and +the Signfont Z families is whether the zero is crossed out or not. In the +Signfont Z family, the zero is crossed out. + +%_font_pkg -n sign-z -f %{fontconf}-signfont-z.conf "TIRESIAS*SIGNFONTZ*.ttf" %prep %setup -q -c -n %{name} @@ -40,32 +178,36 @@ %build %install -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -install -m 0755 -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir} -install -m 0644 -p *.ttf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{fontdir} +rm -rf %{buildroot} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} +install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE5} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-infofont.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE6} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-infofont-z.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE7} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-keyfont-v2.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE8} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-lpfont.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE9} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-pcfont.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE10} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-pcfont-z.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE11} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-signfont.conf +install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE12} %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-signfont-z.conf + +for fontconf in %{fontconf}-infofont.conf %{fontconf}-infofont-z.conf %{fontconf}-keyfont-v2.conf %{fontconf}-lpfont.conf\ + %{fontconf}-pcfont.conf %{fontconf}-pcfont-z.conf %{fontconf}-signfont.conf %{fontconf}-signfont-z.conf; do + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf +done %clean -rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - -%post -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : -fi - -%postun -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then - %{_bindir}/fc-cache -f %{fontdir} || : - fi -fi +rm -rf %{buildroot} -%files +%files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc COPYING/copying.doc COPYING/gpl.txt -%dir %{fontdir} -%{fontdir}/*.ttf +%dir %{_fontdir} %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Tom "spot" Callaway 1.0-3 +- rework to meet new font packaging guidelines + * Wed Jan 2 2008 Tom "spot" Callaway 1.0-2 - font versions didn't change, but sha1sums did From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 20:39:05 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:39:05 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901152039.n0FKd5j4017850@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477468, which changed state. Bug 477468 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 20:39:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477468] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901152039.n0FKd4eX017825@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477468 Tom "spot" Callaway changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2009-01-15 15:39:03 EDT --- Okay, I migrated this one over. It now writes out: tiresias-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.src.rpm tiresias-fonts-common-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-info-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-info-z-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-key-v2-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-lp-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-pc-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-pc-z-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-sign-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm tiresias-sign-z-fonts-1.0-3.fc11.noarch.rpm The font families are: Infofont, Infofont Z, Keyfont V2, LPfont, PCfont, PCfont Z, Signfont, Signfont Z -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nim at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 22:21:18 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:21:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontpackages/devel .cvsignore, 1.5, 1.6 fontpackages.spec, 1.5, 1.6 import.log, 1.5, 1.6 sources, 1.5, 1.6 Message-ID: <20090115222118.8A2C57012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv30804/devel Modified Files: .cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources Log Message: 1.15 Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- .cvsignore 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 +++ .cvsignore 15 Jan 2009 22:20:48 -0000 1.6 @@ -1 +1 @@ -fontpackages-1.14.tar.bz2 +fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 Index: fontpackages.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/fontpackages.spec,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- fontpackages.spec 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 +++ fontpackages.spec 15 Jan 2009 22:20:48 -0000 1.6 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ %define rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/ Name: fontpackages -Version: 1.14 +Version: 1.15 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages @@ -97,8 +97,12 @@ %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.15-1 +??? lua-ize the main macro + * Wed Jan 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot -- 1.13-1 +- 1.14-1 ??? Update for subpackage naming changes requested by FPC * Mon Dec 22 2008 Nicolas Mailhot Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- import.log 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 +++ import.log 15 Jan 2009 22:20:48 -0000 1.6 @@ -3,3 +3,4 @@ fontpackages-1_12-2_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.12-2.fc11.src.rpm:1229863050 fontpackages-1_13-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.13-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229949018 fontpackages-1_14-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.14-1.fc11.src.rpm:1231978787 +fontpackages-1_15-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.15-1.fc11.src.rpm:1232058014 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- sources 15 Jan 2009 00:20:51 -0000 1.5 +++ sources 15 Jan 2009 22:20:48 -0000 1.6 @@ -1 +1 @@ -a90a6bbc2937c847fb32cad0bac41726 fontpackages-1.14.tar.bz2 +69359230ae56bc40320bbe3df61f71d4 fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 From nim at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 22:55:10 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:55:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel dejavu-fonts.spec, 1.92, 1.93 import.log, 1.9, 1.10 Message-ID: <20090115225510.430407012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3088/devel Modified Files: dejavu-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: update for new naming guidelines Index: dejavu-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/dejavu-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.92 retrieving revision 1.93 diff -u -r1.92 -r1.93 --- dejavu-fonts.spec 21 Dec 2008 17:18:48 -0000 1.92 +++ dejavu-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 22:54:37 -0000 1.93 @@ -28,12 +28,12 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 2.28 -Release: 1%{?alphatag}%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?alphatag}%{?dist} Summary: DejaVu fonts Group: User Interface/X License: Bitstream Vera and Public Domain -URL: http://%{fontname}.sf.net/ +URL: http://%{name}.org/ Source0: %{?!alphatag:http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{fontname}}%{?alphatag:%{fontname}.sourceforge.net/snapshots}/%{archivename}.tar.bz2 BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ BuildRequires: %{Blocks} %{UnicodeData} BuildArch: noarch -BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel > 1.13 %description %common_desc @@ -57,7 +57,9 @@ Obsoletes: dejavu-fonts < 2.26-3 Obsoletes: dejavu-fonts-experimental < 2.26-3 -Requires: %{name}-sans, %{name}-serif, %{name}-sans-mono +Requires: %{fontname}-sans-fonts +Requires: %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts +Requires: %{fontname}-serif-fonts %description compat %compat_desc @@ -69,14 +71,16 @@ Obsoletes: dejavu-lgc-fonts < 2.26-3 -Requires: %{name}-lgc-sans, %{name}-lgc-serif, %{name}-lgc-sans-mono +Requires: %{fontname}-lgc-sans-fonts +Requires: %{fontname}-lgc-sans-mono-fonts +Requires: %{fontname}-lgc-serif-fonts %description lgc-compat %compat_desc %package common -Summary: Common files for Dejavu fonts (documentation???) +Summary: Common files for the Dejavu font set Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem @@ -88,7 +92,7 @@ This package consists of files used by other DejaVu packages. -%package sans +%package -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts Summary: Variable-width sans-serif font faces Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} @@ -96,7 +100,10 @@ Conflicts: dejavu-fonts < 2.26-3 Conflicts: dejavu-fonts-experimental < 2.26-3 -%description sans +Obsoletes: %{name}-sans < 2.28-2 +Provides: %{name}-sans = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu sans-serif variable-width font faces, in @@ -105,7 +112,7 @@ %_font_pkg -n sans -f *-%{fontname}-sans.conf DejaVuSans.ttf DejaVuSans-*.ttf DejaVuSansCondensed*.ttf -%package serif +%package -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts Summary: Variable-width serif font faces Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} @@ -113,7 +120,10 @@ Conflicts: dejavu-fonts < 2.26-3 Conflicts: dejavu-fonts-experimental < 2.26-3 -%description serif +Obsoletes: %{name}-serif < 2.28-2 +Provides: %{name}-serif = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu serif variable-width font faces, in their @@ -122,7 +132,7 @@ %_font_pkg -n serif -f *-%{fontname}-serif.conf DejaVuSerif.ttf DejaVuSerif-*.ttf DejaVuSerifCondensed*.ttf -%package sans-mono +%package -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts Summary: Monospace sans-serif font faces Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} @@ -130,7 +140,10 @@ Conflicts: dejavu-fonts < 2.26-3 Conflicts: dejavu-fonts-experimental < 2.26-3 -%description sans-mono +Obsoletes: %{name}-sans-mono < 2.28-2 +Provides: %{name}-sans-mono = %{version}-%{release} + +%description -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu sans-serif monospace font faces, in their @@ -139,14 +152,16 @@ %_font_pkg -n sans-mono -f *-%{fontname}-sans-mono.conf DejaVuSansMono*.ttf -%package lgc-sans +%package -n %{fontname}-lgc-sans-fonts Summary: Variable-width sans-serif font faces, Latin-Greek-Cyrillic subset Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} Conflicts: dejavu-lgc-fonts < 2.26-3 -%description lgc-sans +Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-sans < 2.28-2 + +%description -n %{fontname}-lgc-sans-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu sans-serif variable-width font faces, with @@ -155,14 +170,16 @@ %_font_pkg -n lgc-sans -f *-%{fontname}-lgc-sans.conf DejaVuLGCSans.ttf DejaVuLGCSans-*.ttf DejaVuLGCSansCondensed*.ttf -%package lgc-serif +%package -n %{fontname}-lgc-serif-fonts Summary: Variable-width serif font faces, Latin-Greek-Cyrillic subset Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} Conflicts: dejavu-lgc-fonts < 2.26-3 -%description lgc-serif +Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-sans < 2.28-2 + +%description -n %{fontname}-lgc-serif-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu serif variable-width font faces, with @@ -171,14 +188,16 @@ %_font_pkg -n lgc-serif -f *-%{fontname}-lgc-serif.conf DejaVuLGCSerif.ttf DejaVuLGCSerif-*.ttf DejaVuLGCSerifCondensed*.ttf -%package lgc-sans-mono +%package -n %{fontname}-lgc-sans-mono-fonts Summary: Monospace sans-serif font faces, Latin-Greek-Cyrillic subset Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} Conflicts: dejavu-lgc-fonts < 2.26-3 -%description lgc-sans-mono +Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-sans-mono < 2.28-2 + +%description -n %{fontname}-lgc-sans-mono-fonts %common_desc This package consists of the DejaVu sans-serif monospace font faces, with @@ -237,6 +256,12 @@ %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 2.28-2 +??? Update URL +??? update for new naming guidelines +??? warning: provides for the old names will be dropped before F11 beta + * Sun Dec 21 2008 - 2.28-1 ??? Update to latest release Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.9 retrieving revision 1.10 diff -u -r1.9 -r1.10 --- import.log 21 Dec 2008 17:18:48 -0000 1.9 +++ import.log 15 Jan 2009 22:54:38 -0000 1.10 @@ -7,3 +7,4 @@ dejavu-fonts-2_26-6_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.26-6.fc11.src.rpm:1226221359 dejavu-fonts-2_27-7_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.27-7.fc11.src.rpm:1229544635 dejavu-fonts-2_28-1_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229879833 +dejavu-fonts-2_28-2_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-2.fc11.src.rpm:1232060001 From bugzilla at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 23:16:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462038] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901152316.n0FNGIqV015639@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 --- Comment #18 from Roozbeh Pournader 2009-01-15 18:16:16 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329150) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329150) difference between F10 and F11 requirements of fontforge There is something weird going on with F-10's fontforge. Maybe it wasn't built all right or something. Running "rpm -q -R" on it doesn't even list libuninameslist! Attaching a file showing dependency differences between the output of rpm -q -R between what I built on my machine using devel branch of CVS and the latest F-10 rpm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nim at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 15 23:44:02 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:44:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel bitstream-vera-fonts.spec, 1.11, 1.12 import.log, 1.2, 1.3 Message-ID: <20090115234402.A32447012D@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9217/devel Modified Files: bitstream-vera-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: build with fontpackages 1.15 Index: bitstream-vera-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/bitstream-vera-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.11 retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -r1.11 -r1.12 --- bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 00:28:12 -0000 1.11 +++ bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 23:43:32 -0000 1.12 @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 1.10 -Release: 13%{?dist} +Release: 14%{?dist} Summary: Bitstream Vera fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -122,6 +122,11 @@ %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.10-14 +??? update for new naming guidelines +??? build with new fontpackages (1.15) + * Sun Nov 23 2008 - 1.10-12 ??? ???rpm-fonts??? renamed to ???fontpackages??? Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 15 Jan 2009 00:28:12 -0000 1.2 +++ import.log 15 Jan 2009 23:43:32 -0000 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-12_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-12.fc11.src.rpm:1229541266 bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-13_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-13.fc11.src.rpm:1231979242 +bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-14_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-14.fc11.src.rpm:1232062969 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 00:06:26 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:06:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901160006.n0G06QM3009944@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 Caius CHANCE changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(watchingman at gmail | |.com) --- Comment #8 from Caius CHANCE 2009-01-15 19:06:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > please take a look for web sshot I committed > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=325770) in which > > Letter "R" is marked with red color. the last stroke of "R" is gray not the > same black as other strokes. Could you kindly screenshot the R in non-Pango application? (such as gedit) > I enable slight hinting for Liberation Sans. Would you mind re-confirm in 'gnome-appearance-properties' which anti-aliasing is *off* please? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Fri Jan 16 00:58:43 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gucharmap (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 162370] Print the table! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090116005843.5BDF523F503@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370 gucharmap | general | Ver: 1.4.x ------- Comment #7 from Behdad Esfahbod 2009-01-16 00:58 UTC ------- (In reply to comment #6) > Behdad, IANAL, but this is not an idea. The "idea" part of this is presenting > characters in a chart, which everyone is entitled to. That's what I'm saying indeed. > But copyright protects the presentation part of what Unicode has done. Random > quote from Wikipedia: "Copyright does not cover ideas and information > themselves, only the form or manner in which they are expressed." The expression of the idea is the code generating it or the generated output. Since we are not literally copying any of those, we're good. > So, if we want to print Unicode character charts with 16 rows and a hex digit > on each row and the rest of the character code at top of each column, write the > character code under each glyph, and gray-out the area for not-yet-encoded > characters, that may be illegal copying. No that's not. We are not using source code or generated output from the consortium. Really, copyright is for something you have created, patent is for ideas. A certain layout is an idea. A piece of source code or a generated output is copyrightable. The idea of generated such a thing is at best patentable. See: http://lowendmac.com/orchard/06/apple-vs-microsoft.html To quote: "...and most of the other ten were not violations of Apple's copyright due to the merger doctrine (the merger doctrine stipulates that ideas cannot be copyrighted). In the case of Apple vs. Microsoft, many of the displays Apple contested were ideas and could not be protected by copyright." What you say is like saying that "application windows are copyright by company X, so doing them in GNOME is making derivative work". Think about wine or any other "free reimplementation" project. Those would have been totally illegal if your reasoning was to be followed. > What I suggest is, if we really want to print character charts (as opposed to > what Nicolas suggested in bug 561908), we should redesign it. Otherwise, our > work could be considered unlicensed derivative work. To produce derivative work, one needs to use an original to begin with. > Still, since GNOME is a member of Unicode, we probably don't want to get on > their nerves. We can ask them officially, if you do not object. I' sure we can work something out. I'm more talking theoretically. > CC-ing Luis, asking for insight and advice. -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370. From bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org Fri Jan 16 00:59:26 2009 From: bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.gnome.org (gucharmap (bugzilla.gnome.org)) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:59:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Bug 162370] Print the table! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090116005926.C1D8223EF5E@label.gnome.org> If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370 gucharmap | general | Ver: 1.4.x ------- Comment #8 from Behdad Esfahbod 2009-01-16 00:59 UTC ------- For the record, IANAL. -- See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone if you are having problems with the system. You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=162370. From cchance at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 02:43:25 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:43:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel 65-baekmuk-ttf-batang.conf, NONE, 1.1 65-baekmuk-ttf-dotum.conf, NONE, 1.1 65-baekmuk-ttf-gulim.conf, NONE, 1.1 65-baekmuk-ttf-hline.conf, NONE, 1.1 baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec, 1.6, 1.7 Message-ID: <20090116024325.425D270127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv29418 Modified Files: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec Added Files: 65-baekmuk-ttf-batang.conf 65-baekmuk-ttf-dotum.conf 65-baekmuk-ttf-gulim.conf 65-baekmuk-ttf-hline.conf Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-11.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Include macro _font_pkg and created fontconfig .conf files.) --- NEW FILE 65-baekmuk-ttf-batang.conf --- Baekmuk Batang serif serif Baekmuk Batang --- NEW FILE 65-baekmuk-ttf-dotum.conf --- Baekmuk Dotum sans-serif sans-serif Baekmuk Dotum --- NEW FILE 65-baekmuk-ttf-gulim.conf --- Baekmuk Gulim monospace monospace Baekmuk Gulim --- NEW FILE 65-baekmuk-ttf-hline.conf --- Index: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel/baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.6 retrieving revision 1.7 diff -u -r1.6 -r1.7 --- baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 9 Jan 2009 00:05:40 -0000 1.6 +++ baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 02:42:55 -0000 1.7 @@ -1,24 +1,27 @@ %define fontname baekmuk-ttf -%define fontconf <65>-%{fontname} -%define archivename %{name}-%{version} +%define archivename %{fontname}-%{version} %define common_desc \ This package provides the free Korean TrueType fonts. -%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} -%define cidmapdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d +%define fontdir %{_datadir}/fonts/%{fontname} +%define gsdir %{_datadir}/ghostscript/conf.d %define catalogue %{_sysconfdir}/X11/fontpath.d Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 2.2 -Release: 10%{?dist} +Release: 11%{?dist} Summary: Free Korean TrueType fonts Group: User Interface/X License: Baekmuk URL: http://kldp.net/projects/baekmuk/ -Source0: http://kldp.net/frs/download.php/1429/%{fontname}-%{version}.tar.gz +Source0: http://kldp.net/frs/download.php/1429/%{archivename}.tar.gz Source1: FAPIcidfmap.ko Source2: cidfmap.ko +Source3: 65-baekmuk-ttf-batang.conf +Source4: 65-baekmuk-ttf-dotum.conf +Source5: 65-baekmuk-ttf-gulim.conf +Source6: 65-baekmuk-ttf-hline.conf Obsoletes: fonts-korean @@ -41,80 +44,133 @@ This package contains some common files for Baekmuk Korean TrueType fonts. -%define mk_pkg()\ -%package %1\ -Summary: Korean Baekmuk TrueType %2 typeface\ -License: Baekmuk\ -Group: User Interface/X\ -Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6\ -Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common\ -\ -%description %1\ -%common_desc\ -\ -This package contains the Korean TrueType font %2 typeface.\ -\ -%post %1\ -if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then\ - %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts\ -fi\ -\ -%postun %1\ -if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then\ - if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then\ - %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts\ - fi\ -fi\ -\ -%files %1\ -%defattr(-,root,root,-)\ -%dir %{fontdir}-%1\ -%{fontdir}-%1/*.ttf\ -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}-%1/fonts.dir\ -%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}-%1/fonts.scale\ -%{catalogue}/%{name}-%1 - -%mk_pkg batang Batang -%mk_pkg dotum Dotum -%mk_pkg gulim Gulim -%mk_pkg hline Headline +%package batang +Summary: Korean Baekmuk TrueType Batang typeface +License: Baekmuk +Group: User Interface/X +Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6 +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common + +%description batang +%common_desc + +This package contains the Korean TrueType font Batang typeface. + +%_font_pkg -n batang -f *-%{fontname}-batang*.conf batang.ttf + +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{catalogue}/%{fontname} + +%package dotum +Summary: Korean Baekmuk TrueType Dotum typeface +License: Baekmuk +Group: User Interface/X +Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6 +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common + +%description dotum +%common_desc + +This package contains the Korean TrueType font Dotum typeface. + +%_font_pkg -n dotum -f *-%{fontname}-dotum*.conf dotum.ttf + +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{catalogue}/%{fontname} + +%package gulim +Summary: Korean Baekmuk TrueType Gulim typeface +License: Baekmuk +Group: User Interface/X +Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6 +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common + +%description gulim +%common_desc + +This package contains the Korean TrueType font Gulim typeface. + +%_font_pkg -n gulim -f *-%{fontname}-gulim*.conf gulim.ttf + +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{catalogue}/%{fontname} + +%package hline +Summary: Korean Baekmuk TrueType Headline typeface +License: Baekmuk +Group: User Interface/X +Obsoletes: ttfonts-ko < 1.0.11-33 fonts-korean < 2.2-6 +Requires: fontpackages-filesystem, %{name}-common + +%description hline +%common_desc + +This package contains the Korean TrueType font Headline typeface. + +%_font_pkg -n hline -f *-%{fontname}-hline*.conf hline.ttf + +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.dir +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%verify(not md5 size mtime) %{catalogue}/%{fontname} %prep -%setup -q -n %{fontname}-%{version} +%setup -q -n %{archivename} %build %{nil} %install -rm -rf %{buildroot} - -# for catalogue -install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +%__rm -rf %{buildroot} +# font +%__install -d -m 0755 %{buildroot}%{fontdir} for i in batang dotum gulim hline; do - install -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i - install -p -m 0644 ttf/$i.ttf %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i - ln -sf ../../..%{fontdir}-$i %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{name}-$i - %{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i -o %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i/fonts.scale - mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{fontdir}-$i + %__install -p -m 0644 ttf/$i.ttf %{buildroot}%{fontdir} +done + +# fontconfig conf +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} +%__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} +cd ../ +for fconf in `ls *-%{fontname}-*.conf` +do + %__install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ + %__ln_s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done +cd - -# for ghostscript -install -d %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir} -install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ -install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{cidmapdir}/ +# fonts.{scale,dir} +%{_bindir}/ttmkfdir -d %{buildroot}%{fontdir} \ + -o %{buildroot}%{fontdir}/fonts.scale +%{_bindir}/mkfontdir %{buildroot}%{fontdir} + +# ghostscript +%__install -d -m 0755 %{buildroot}%{gsdir} +%__install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ +%__install -p -m 0644 %{SOURCE2} %{buildroot}%{gsdir}/ + +# catalogue +%__install -d %{buildroot}%{catalogue} +%__ln_s %{fontdir} %{buildroot}%{catalogue}/%{fontname} # convert Korean copyright file to utf8 -iconv -f EUC-KR -t UTF-8 COPYRIGHT.ks > COPYRIGHT.ko +%{_bindir}/iconv -f EUC-KR -t UTF-8 COPYRIGHT.ks > COPYRIGHT.ko %clean -rm -rf %{buildroot} +%__rm -rf %{buildroot} %files common %doc COPYRIGHT COPYRIGHT.ko README -%{cidmapdir}/ +%{gsdir}/ %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-11.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Include macro _font_pkg and created fontconfig .conf files.) + * Fri Jan 09 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-10.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Convert to new font packaging guidelines.) From cchance at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 04:19:12 2009 From: cchance at fedoraproject.org (Caius Chance) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:19:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec,1.7,1.8 Message-ID: <20090116041912.C4FBD70127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: cchance Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv7496 Modified Files: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-12.fc11 - Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Repatched buildsys error.) Index: baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/baekmuk-ttf-fonts/devel/baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.7 retrieving revision 1.8 diff -u -r1.7 -r1.8 --- baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 02:42:55 -0000 1.7 +++ baekmuk-ttf-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 04:18:42 -0000 1.8 @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 2.2 -Release: 11%{?dist} +Release: 12%{?dist} Summary: Free Korean TrueType fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -135,11 +135,11 @@ %__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} %__install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} cd ../ -for fconf in `ls *-%{fontname}-*.conf` +for fconf in %{SOURCE3} %{SOURCE4} %{SOURCE5} %{SOURCE6} do %__install -m 0644 $fconf %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/ - %__ln_s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf + %__ln_s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/`basename $fconf` \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/`basename $fconf` done cd - @@ -168,11 +168,14 @@ %{gsdir}/ %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-12.fc11 +- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Repatched buildsys error.) + * Fri Jan 16 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-11.fc11 -- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Include macro _font_pkg and created fontconfig .conf files.) +- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Included macro _font_pkg and created fontconfig .conf files.) * Fri Jan 09 2009 Caius Chance - 2.2-10.fc11 -- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Convert to new font packaging guidelines.) +- Resolves: rhbz#477332 (Converted to new font packaging guidelines.) * Mon Jun 30 2008 Caius Chance - 2.2-9.fc10 - Refine obsoletes tag version-release specific. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 05:19:20 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:19:20 -0500 Subject: [Bug 462038] Hotkeys has no response and "Go To" window couldn't be inputted. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901160519.n0G5JKKZ011121@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462038 --- Comment #19 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-01-16 00:19:19 EDT --- Yeah, the one in rawhide was built with pango/cairo/spiro support. That support was not available (Or didn't work) when the f10 fontforge was built, so that explains a lot of them. Not sure why libuninameslist isn't in there. :( thats odd. Can you see any ill effect from it? That might be one more reason to try and update f10's fontforge... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From behdad at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 05:45:26 2009 From: behdad at fedoraproject.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:45:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontconfig/devel .cvsignore, 1.30, 1.31 fontconfig.spec, 1.109, 1.110 sources, 1.31, 1.32 Message-ID: <20090116054526.9E3D370127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: behdad Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv18376 Modified Files: .cvsignore fontconfig.spec sources Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.30 retrieving revision 1.31 diff -u -r1.30 -r1.31 --- .cvsignore 1 Jun 2008 03:48:56 -0000 1.30 +++ .cvsignore 16 Jan 2009 05:44:55 -0000 1.31 @@ -1 +1 @@ -fontconfig-2.6.0.tar.gz +fontconfig-2.6.90.tar.gz Index: fontconfig.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/fontconfig.spec,v retrieving revision 1.109 retrieving revision 1.110 diff -u -r1.109 -r1.110 --- fontconfig.spec 20 Oct 2008 22:58:41 -0000 1.109 +++ fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:44:55 -0000 1.110 @@ -2,8 +2,8 @@ Summary: Font configuration and customization library Name: fontconfig -Version: 2.6.0 -Release: 3%{?dist} +Version: 2.6.90 +Release: 1.git.63.g6bb4b9a%{?dist} License: MIT Group: System Environment/Libraries Source: http://fontconfig.org/release/fontconfig-%{version}.tar.gz @@ -132,6 +132,9 @@ %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a +- Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a + * Mon Oct 20 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.0-3 - Add fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch - Resolves: #464470 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.31 retrieving revision 1.32 diff -u -r1.31 -r1.32 --- sources 1 Jun 2008 03:48:56 -0000 1.31 +++ sources 16 Jan 2009 05:44:55 -0000 1.32 @@ -1 +1 @@ -ab54ec1d4ddd836313fdbc0cd5299d6d fontconfig-2.6.0.tar.gz +c907dd0ebec0e95ddae1f5f65b1ada4e fontconfig-2.6.90.tar.gz From behdad at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 05:46:51 2009 From: behdad at fedoraproject.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:46:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontconfig/devel fontconfig.spec,1.110,1.111 Message-ID: <20090116054651.4528570127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: behdad Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv18569 Modified Files: fontconfig.spec Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a Index: fontconfig.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/fontconfig.spec,v retrieving revision 1.110 retrieving revision 1.111 diff -u -r1.110 -r1.111 --- fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:44:55 -0000 1.110 +++ fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:46:20 -0000 1.111 @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog -* Fri Jan 16 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a +* Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a * Mon Oct 20 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.0-3 From behdad at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 05:53:51 2009 From: behdad at fedoraproject.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:53:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontconfig/devel fontconfig.spec, 1.111, 1.112 fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch, 1.1, NONE Message-ID: <20090116055351.7431570127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: behdad Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19537 Modified Files: fontconfig.spec Removed Files: fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-2.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Remove upstreamed patch Index: fontconfig.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/fontconfig.spec,v retrieving revision 1.111 retrieving revision 1.112 diff -u -r1.111 -r1.112 --- fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:46:20 -0000 1.111 +++ fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:53:21 -0000 1.112 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ Summary: Font configuration and customization library Name: fontconfig Version: 2.6.90 -Release: 1.git.63.g6bb4b9a%{?dist} +Release: 2.git.63.g6bb4b9a%{?dist} License: MIT Group: System Environment/Libraries Source: http://fontconfig.org/release/fontconfig-%{version}.tar.gz @@ -23,8 +23,6 @@ # reference the new path in %%configure Conflicts: fonts-xorg-base, fonts-xorg-syriac -Patch0: fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch - %description Fontconfig is designed to locate fonts within the system and select them according to requirements specified by @@ -46,7 +44,6 @@ %prep %setup -q -%patch0 -p0 -b .indic %build @@ -132,8 +129,9 @@ %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog -* Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a +* Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-2.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a +- Remove upstreamed patch * Mon Oct 20 2008 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.0-3 - Add fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch --- fontconfig-2.6.0-indic.patch DELETED --- From behdad at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 05:58:41 2009 From: behdad at fedoraproject.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 05:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontconfig/devel fontconfig.spec,1.112,1.113 Message-ID: <20090116055841.213C870142@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: behdad Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20144 Modified Files: fontconfig.spec Log Message: * Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - * 2.6.90-3.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Install fc-scan and fc-query Index: fontconfig.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fontconfig/devel/fontconfig.spec,v retrieving revision 1.112 retrieving revision 1.113 diff -u -r1.112 -r1.113 --- fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:53:21 -0000 1.112 +++ fontconfig.spec 16 Jan 2009 05:58:10 -0000 1.113 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ Summary: Font configuration and customization library Name: fontconfig Version: 2.6.90 -Release: 2.git.63.g6bb4b9a%{?dist} +Release: 3.git.63.g6bb4b9a%{?dist} License: MIT Group: System Environment/Libraries Source: http://fontconfig.org/release/fontconfig-%{version}.tar.gz @@ -105,9 +105,11 @@ %doc fontconfig-user.txt fontconfig-user.html %{_libdir}/libfontconfig.so.* %{_bindir}/fc-cache +%{_bindir}/fc-cat %{_bindir}/fc-list %{_bindir}/fc-match -%{_bindir}/fc-cat +%{_bindir}/fc-query +%{_bindir}/fc-scan %dir %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/conf.avail %dir %{_datadir}/fonts %{_sysconfdir}/fonts/fonts.dtd @@ -129,6 +131,9 @@ %{_mandir}/man3/* %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-3.git.63.g6bb4b9a +- Install fc-scan and fc-query + * Fri Jan 16 2009 Behdad Esfahbod - 2.6.90-2.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Update to 2.6.90-1.git.63.g6bb4b9a - Remove upstreamed patch From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 07:45:03 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-cm-lgc Message-ID: <20090116074503.304BD1F8261@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-cm-lgc has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On x86_64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On i386: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On ppc64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 07:45:03 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis Message-ID: <20090116074503.69B221F825C@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 12:08:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:08:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901161208.n0GC84Bo019896@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #10 from san 2009-01-16 07:08:03 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329197) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329197) antialias use Subpixel option in Ubuntu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 12:06:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:06:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901161206.n0GC6bi7019711@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 san changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(watchingman at gmail | |.com) | --- Comment #9 from san 2009-01-16 07:06:35 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329196) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329196) antialias use Grayscale option in Ubuntu -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 12:12:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:12:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 474734] Blurriness of Latin letter R (U+0052) in Liberation Regular In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901161212.n0GCC0x5006147@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474734 --- Comment #11 from san 2009-01-16 07:11:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > please take a look for web sshot I committed > > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=325770) in which > > > > Letter "R" is marked with red color. the last stroke of "R" is gray not the > > same black as other strokes. > > Could you kindly screenshot the R in non-Pango application? (such as gedit) > > > > I enable slight hinting for Liberation Sans. > > Would you mind re-confirm in 'gnome-appearance-properties' which anti-aliasing > is *off* please? refer to comment 9 and 10. it seems antialias with subpixel enabled cannot get blurriness. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 16:41:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:41:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901161641.n0GGfT4D004588@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477480, which changed state. Bug 477480 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477480 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 16:41:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:41:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477480] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901161641.n0GGfSKh004564@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477480 Karel Voln? changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Karel Voln? 2009-01-16 11:41:27 EDT --- fixed by removing the bundled font and rather depending on the packaged version (as it was just a copy of DejaVu Sans Mono) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 18:52:20 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:52:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontpackages/F-10 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 fontpackages.spec, 1.1, 1.2 import.log, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.2, 1.3 Message-ID: <20090116185220.458E370142@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-10 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19640/F-10 Modified Files: .cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources Log Message: Import 1.15 to use FPC and FESCO approved package naming by default Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-10/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- .cvsignore 15 Dec 2008 22:20:35 -0000 1.2 +++ .cvsignore 16 Jan 2009 18:51:49 -0000 1.3 @@ -1 +1 @@ -fontpackages-1.11.tar.bz2 +fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 Index: fontpackages.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-10/fontpackages.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- fontpackages.spec 15 Dec 2008 22:20:35 -0000 1.1 +++ fontpackages.spec 16 Jan 2009 18:51:49 -0000 1.2 @@ -1,8 +1,9 @@ %define spectemplatedir %{_sysconfdir}/rpmdevtools/ +%define ftcgtemplatedir %{_datadir}/fontconfig/templates/ %define rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/ Name: fontpackages -Version: 1.11 +Version: 1.15 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages @@ -10,8 +11,7 @@ # Mostly means the scriptlets inserted via this package do not change the # license of the packages they're inserted in License: LGPLv3+ -# Or git://git.fedorahosted.org/fontpackages.git -URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fonts_SIG +URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages/ Source0: http://fedorahosted.org/releases/f/o/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 BuildArch: noarch BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) @@ -53,22 +53,27 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot} # Pull macros out of macros.fonts and emulate them during install -for dir in fontbasedir fontconfig_confdir fontconfig_templatedir ; do +for dir in fontbasedir fontconfig_masterdir \ + fontconfig_confdir fontconfig_templatedir ; do export _${dir}=$(rpm --eval $(%{__grep} -E "^%_${dir}\b" \ macros/macros.fonts | %{__awk} '{ print $2 }')) done install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}${_fontbasedir} \ + %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_masterdir} \ %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_confdir} \ %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} \ - %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} -install -m 0644 -p spec-templates/*.spec %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} -install -m 0644 -p macros/macros* %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} + %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} \ + %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fontconfig/templates +install -m 0644 -p spec-templates/*.spec %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} +install -m 0644 -p fontconfig-templates/* %{buildroot}%{ftcgtemplatedir} +install -m 0644 -p macros/macros* %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} cat < %{name}-%{version}.files %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %dir ${_fontbasedir} +%dir ${_fontconfig_masterdir} %dir ${_fontconfig_confdir} %dir ${_fontconfig_templatedir} EOF @@ -78,26 +83,52 @@ %files filesystem -f %{name}-%{version}.files +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) +%dir %{_datadir}/fontconfig %files devel %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) -%doc license.txt readme.txt fontconfig-templates/ +%doc license.txt readme.txt %config(noreplace) %{spectemplatedir}/*.spec %config(noreplace) %{rpmmacrodir}/macros* +%dir %{ftcgtemplatedir} +%{ftcgtemplatedir}/* %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.15-1 +??? lua-ize the main macro + +* Wed Jan 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.14-1 +??? Update for subpackage naming changes requested by FPC + +* Mon Dec 22 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.13-1 +??? Add another directory to avoid depending on unowned stuff +??? use it to put the fontconfig examples in a better place + +* Sun Dec 21 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.12-2 +??? Change homepage + +* Fri Dec 19 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.12-1 +??? Add another macro to allow building fontconfig without cycling + * Wed Dec 10 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.11-1 ??? Add actual fedorahosted references + * Sun Nov 23 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.10-1 ??? renamed to ???fontpackages??? + * Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.9-1 ??? fix and complete fontconfig doc -* Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.8-1 ??? simplify multi spec template: codify general case - 1.7-1 Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-10/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- import.log 15 Dec 2008 22:20:35 -0000 1.1 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 18:51:49 -0000 1.2 @@ -1 +1,2 @@ fontpackages-1_11-1_fc11:F-10:fontpackages-1.11-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229379612 +fontpackages-1_15-1_fc11:F-10:fontpackages-1.15-1.fc11.src.rpm:1232131877 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-10/sources,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- sources 15 Dec 2008 22:20:35 -0000 1.2 +++ sources 16 Jan 2009 18:51:49 -0000 1.3 @@ -1 +1 @@ -362046a39434fe95ea9c9ab4ea4880ba fontpackages-1.11.tar.bz2 +69359230ae56bc40320bbe3df61f71d4 fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 18:53:05 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/fontpackages/F-9 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 fontpackages.spec, 1.1, 1.2 import.log, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.2, 1.3 Message-ID: <20090116185305.4B87E70141@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-9 In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv19834/F-9 Modified Files: .cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources Log Message: Import 1.15 to use FPC and FESCO approved package naming by default Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-9/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- .cvsignore 15 Dec 2008 22:33:49 -0000 1.2 +++ .cvsignore 16 Jan 2009 18:52:34 -0000 1.3 @@ -1 +1 @@ -fontpackages-1.11.tar.bz2 +fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 Index: fontpackages.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-9/fontpackages.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- fontpackages.spec 15 Dec 2008 22:33:49 -0000 1.1 +++ fontpackages.spec 16 Jan 2009 18:52:34 -0000 1.2 @@ -1,8 +1,9 @@ %define spectemplatedir %{_sysconfdir}/rpmdevtools/ +%define ftcgtemplatedir %{_datadir}/fontconfig/templates/ %define rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/ Name: fontpackages -Version: 1.11 +Version: 1.15 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages @@ -10,8 +11,7 @@ # Mostly means the scriptlets inserted via this package do not change the # license of the packages they're inserted in License: LGPLv3+ -# Or git://git.fedorahosted.org/fontpackages.git -URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fonts_SIG +URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages/ Source0: http://fedorahosted.org/releases/f/o/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 BuildArch: noarch BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) @@ -53,22 +53,27 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot} # Pull macros out of macros.fonts and emulate them during install -for dir in fontbasedir fontconfig_confdir fontconfig_templatedir ; do +for dir in fontbasedir fontconfig_masterdir \ + fontconfig_confdir fontconfig_templatedir ; do export _${dir}=$(rpm --eval $(%{__grep} -E "^%_${dir}\b" \ macros/macros.fonts | %{__awk} '{ print $2 }')) done install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}${_fontbasedir} \ + %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_masterdir} \ %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_confdir} \ %{buildroot}${_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} \ - %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} -install -m 0644 -p spec-templates/*.spec %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} -install -m 0644 -p macros/macros* %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} + %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} \ + %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/fontconfig/templates +install -m 0644 -p spec-templates/*.spec %{buildroot}%{spectemplatedir} +install -m 0644 -p fontconfig-templates/* %{buildroot}%{ftcgtemplatedir} +install -m 0644 -p macros/macros* %{buildroot}%{rpmmacrodir} cat < %{name}-%{version}.files %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %dir ${_fontbasedir} +%dir ${_fontconfig_masterdir} %dir ${_fontconfig_confdir} %dir ${_fontconfig_templatedir} EOF @@ -78,26 +83,52 @@ %files filesystem -f %{name}-%{version}.files +%defattr(0644,root,root,0755) +%dir %{_datadir}/fontconfig %files devel %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) -%doc license.txt readme.txt fontconfig-templates/ +%doc license.txt readme.txt %config(noreplace) %{spectemplatedir}/*.spec %config(noreplace) %{rpmmacrodir}/macros* +%dir %{ftcgtemplatedir} +%{ftcgtemplatedir}/* %changelog +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.15-1 +??? lua-ize the main macro + +* Wed Jan 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.14-1 +??? Update for subpackage naming changes requested by FPC + +* Mon Dec 22 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.13-1 +??? Add another directory to avoid depending on unowned stuff +??? use it to put the fontconfig examples in a better place + +* Sun Dec 21 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.12-2 +??? Change homepage + +* Fri Dec 19 2008 Nicolas Mailhot +- 1.12-1 +??? Add another macro to allow building fontconfig without cycling + * Wed Dec 10 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.11-1 ??? Add actual fedorahosted references + * Sun Nov 23 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.10-1 ??? renamed to ???fontpackages??? + * Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.9-1 ??? fix and complete fontconfig doc -* Fri Nov 14 2008 Nicolas Mailhot - 1.8-1 ??? simplify multi spec template: codify general case - 1.7-1 Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-9/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- import.log 15 Dec 2008 22:33:49 -0000 1.1 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 18:52:34 -0000 1.2 @@ -1 +1,2 @@ fontpackages-1_11-1_fc11:F-9:fontpackages-1.11-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229380405 +fontpackages-1_15-1_fc11:F-9:fontpackages-1.15-1.fc11.src.rpm:1232131899 Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/F-9/sources,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- sources 15 Dec 2008 22:33:49 -0000 1.2 +++ sources 16 Jan 2009 18:52:34 -0000 1.3 @@ -1 +1 @@ -362046a39434fe95ea9c9ab4ea4880ba fontpackages-1.11.tar.bz2 +69359230ae56bc40320bbe3df61f71d4 fontpackages-1.15.tar.bz2 From pkgdb at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 20:41:52 2009 From: pkgdb at fedoraproject.org (Fedora PackageDB) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:41:52 +0000 Subject: [pkgdb] abyssinica-fonts ownership updated Message-ID: <20090116204152.D36BB208203@bastion.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Package abyssinica-fonts in Fedora devel is now owned by nim To make changes to this package see: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/abyssinica-fonts From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 21:14:13 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:14:13 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel ecolier-court-fonts.spec, 1.3, 1.4 import.log, 1.3, 1.4 Message-ID: <20090116211413.D029870127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv3100/devel Modified Files: ecolier-court-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: update for new naming guidelines Index: ecolier-court-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/ecolier-court-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- ecolier-court-fonts.spec 17 Dec 2008 20:00:39 -0000 1.3 +++ ecolier-court-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 21:13:43 -0000 1.4 @@ -11,8 +11,8 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 20070702 -Release: 5%{?dist} -Summary: ??colier court cursive fonts +Release: 6%{?dist} +Summary: Schoolchildren cursive fonts Group: User Interface/X License: OFL @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ %package common -Summary: ??colier court, common files (documentation???) +Summary: Common files of the ??colier Court font set Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem @@ -47,16 +47,16 @@ This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. -%package lignes -Summary: ??colier lignes court fantasy font +%package -n %{fontname}-lignes-fonts +Summary: Schoolchildren cursive fonts with lines Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} -%description lignes +%description -n %{fontname}-lignes-fonts %common_desc -The ?? lignes ?? (lines) font variant includes the Seyes lining commonly used by -schoolchildren notepads. +The ?? lignes ?? (lines) ??colier court font variant includes the Seyes lining +commonly used by schoolchildren notepads. %_font_pkg -n lignes -f %{fontconf}.conf ec_cour.ttf @@ -91,10 +91,10 @@ install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE5} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-lignes.conf -for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf \ - %{fontconf}-lignes.conf ; do - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf +for fconf in %{fontconf}.conf \ + %{fontconf}-lignes.conf ; do + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done %clean @@ -109,6 +109,10 @@ %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2009 +- 20070702-6 +??? Convert to new naming guidelines + * Wed Dec 17 2008 - 20070702-5 ??? Workaround RHEL5 rpm unicode bug to fix koji build Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 20:00:39 -0000 1.3 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 21:13:43 -0000 1.4 @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-1_fc10:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-1.fc10.src.rpm:1216485467 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-4_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-4.fc11.src.rpm:1229541673 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5.fc11.src.rpm:1229543899 +ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6.fc11.src.rpm:1232140382 From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 21:28:02 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:28:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/stix-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3 stix-fonts.spec,1.5,1.6 Message-ID: <20090116212802.D246D70142@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/stix-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv5947/devel Modified Files: import.log stix-fonts.spec Log Message: update for new naming guidelines Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/stix-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:58:52 -0000 1.2 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 21:27:32 -0000 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ stix-fonts-0_9-7_fc10:HEAD:stix-fonts-0.9-7.fc10.src.rpm:1215809789 stix-fonts-0_9-9_fc11:HEAD:stix-fonts-0.9-9.fc11.src.rpm:1229543904 +stix-fonts-0_9-10_fc11:HEAD:stix-fonts-0.9-10.fc11.src.rpm:1232141192 Index: stix-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/stix-fonts/devel/stix-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- stix-fonts.spec 17 Dec 2008 19:58:52 -0000 1.5 +++ stix-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 21:27:32 -0000 1.6 @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 0.9 -Release: 9%{?dist} +Release: 10%{?dist} Summary: STIX scientific and engineering fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -37,12 +37,14 @@ use. -%package pua +%package -n %{fontname}-pua-fonts Summary: STIX scientific and engineering fonts, PUA glyphs Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} -%description pua +Obsoletes: %{name}-pua < 0.9-10 + +%description -n %{fontname}-pua-fonts %common_desc This package includes fonts containing glyphs called out from the Unicode @@ -54,12 +56,14 @@ %_font_pkg -n pua -f %{fontconf}-pua.conf STIXNonUni*otf -%package integrals +%package -n %{fontname}-integrals-fonts Summary: STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional integral glyphs Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} -%description integrals +Obsoletes: %{name}-integrals < 0.9-10 + +%description -n %{fontname}-integrals-fonts %common_desc This package includes fonts containing additional integrals of various size @@ -68,12 +72,14 @@ %_font_pkg -n integrals -f %{fontconf}-integrals.conf STIXInt*.otf -%package sizes +%package -n %{fontname}-sizes-fonts Summary: STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional glyph sizes Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} -%description sizes +Obsoletes: %{name}-sizes < 0.9-10 + +%description -n %{fontname}-sizes-fonts %common_desc This package includes fonts containing glyphs in additional sizes (Mostly @@ -82,12 +88,14 @@ %_font_pkg -n sizes -f %{fontconf}-sizes.conf STIXSiz*.otf -%package variants +%package -n %{fontname}-variants-fonts Summary: STIX scientific and engineering fonts, additional glyph variants Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} -%description variants +Obsoletes: %{name}-variants < 0.9-10 + +%description -n %{fontname}-variants-fonts %common_desc This package includes fonts containing alternative variants of some glyphs. @@ -129,13 +137,13 @@ install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE6} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf}-variants.conf -for fontconf in %{fontconf}.conf \ - %{fontconf}-pua.conf \ - %{fontconf}-integrals.conf \ - %{fontconf}-sizes.conf \ - %{fontconf}-variants.conf ; do - ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf \ - %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf +for fconf in %{fontconf}.conf \ + %{fontconf}-pua.conf \ + %{fontconf}-integrals.conf \ + %{fontconf}-sizes.conf \ + %{fontconf}-variants.conf ; do + ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fconf \ + %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fconf done @@ -150,6 +158,10 @@ %changelog +* Fri Jan 16 2009 +- 0.9-10 +??? Convert to new naming guidelines + * Sun Nov 23 2008 - 0.9-9 ??? ???rpm-fonts??? renamed to ???fontpackages??? From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 22:09:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:09:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 475661] Review Request: google-droid-fonts - General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901162209.n0GM9Xre022994@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475661 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-16 17:09:32 EDT --- Will let it steam in rawhide a bit before importing in stable releases as it includes CJK fonts and we always seem to get them wrong at first somehow -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 22:11:10 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel NOTICE, NONE, 1.1 README.txt, NONE, 1.1 google-droid-fonts-sans-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 google-droid-fonts-sans-mono-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 google-droid-fonts-serif-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 google-droid-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 import.log, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090116221110.721F170127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv12735/devel Modified Files: .cvsignore sources Added Files: NOTICE README.txt google-droid-fonts-sans-fontconfig.conf google-droid-fonts-sans-mono-fontconfig.conf google-droid-fonts-serif-fontconfig.conf google-droid-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: initial import --- NEW FILE NOTICE --- Copyright (c) 2005-2008, The Android Open Source Project Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License. Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004 http://www.apache.org/licenses/ TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION 1. Definitions. "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction, and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document. "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by the copyright owner that is granting the License. "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition, "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity. "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity exercising permissions granted by this License. "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications, including but not limited to software source code, documentation source, and configuration files. "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical transformation or translation of a Source form, including but not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation, and conversions to other media types. "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work (an example is provided in the Appendix below). "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof. "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted" means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution." "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and subsequently incorporated within the Work. 2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form. 3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s) with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You institute patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. 4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions: (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and may provide additional or different license terms and conditions for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use, reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with the conditions stated in this License. 5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions. 6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor, except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file. 7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License. 8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory, whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise, unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special, incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill, work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor has been advised of the possibility of such damages. 9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer, and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity, or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify, defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability. END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS --- NEW FILE README.txt --- Copyright (C) 2008 The Android Open Source Project Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License. ########## This directory contains the fonts for the platform. They are licensed under the Apache 2 license. --- NEW FILE google-droid-fonts-sans-fontconfig.conf --- sans-serif Droid Sans Droid Sans sans-serif Droid Sans Fallback Droid Sans --- NEW FILE google-droid-fonts-sans-mono-fontconfig.conf --- monospace Droid Sans Mono Droid Sans Mono monospace --- NEW FILE google-droid-fonts-serif-fontconfig.conf --- serif Droid Serif Droid Serif serif --- NEW FILE google-droid-fonts.spec --- %define fontname google-droid %define download_root http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=platform/frameworks/base.git;a=blob_plain;f=data/fonts %define common_desc \ The Droid typeface family was designed in the fall of 2006 by Ascender???s \ Steve Matteson, as a commission from Google to create a set of system fonts \ for its Android platform. The goal was to provide optimal quality and comfort \ on a mobile handset when rendered in application menus, web browsers and for \ other screen text. Name: %{fontname}-fonts # The font files all have the same version except for sans fallback which I'm going to ignore here Version: 1.0.112 Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android Group: User Interface/X License: ASL 2.0 URL: http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=platform/frameworks/base.git;a=tree;f=data/fonts Source1: %{download_root}/DroidSans.ttf Source2: %{download_root}/DroidSans-Bold.ttf Source3: %{download_root}/DroidSansFallback.ttf Source4: %{download_root}/DroidSansMono.ttf Source5: %{download_root}/DroidSerif-Regular.ttf Source6: %{download_root}/DroidSerif-Bold.ttf Source7: %{download_root}/DroidSerif-Italic.ttf Source8: %{download_root}/DroidSerif-BoldItalic.ttf Source9: %{download_root}/NOTICE Source10: %{download_root}/README.txt Source11: %{name}-sans-fontconfig.conf Source12: %{name}-sans-mono-fontconfig.conf Source13: %{name}-serif-fontconfig.conf BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel %description %common_desc %package common Summary: Common files of the Droid font set Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description common %common_desc This package consists of files used by other %{name} packages. %package -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts Summary: A humanist sans serif typeface Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description -n %{fontname}-sans-fonts %common_desc Droid Sans is a humanist sans serif typeface designed for user interfaces and electronic communication. %_font_pkg -n sans -f ??-%{fontname}-sans.conf DroidSans.ttf DroidSans-Bold.ttf DroidSansFallback.ttf %package -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts Summary: A humanist monospace sans serif typeface Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description -n %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts %common_desc Droid Sans Mono is a humanist monospace sans serif typeface designed for user interfaces and electronic communication. %_font_pkg -n sans-mono -f ??-%{fontname}-sans-mono.conf DroidSansMono.ttf %package -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts Summary: A serif typeface Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} %description -n %{fontname}-serif-fonts %common_desc Droid Serif is a contemporary serif typeface family designed for comfortable reading on screen. Droid Serif is slightly condensed to maximize the amount of text displayed on small screens. Vertical stress and open forms contribute to its readability while its proportion and overall design complement its companion Droid Sans. %_font_pkg -n serif -f ??-%{fontname}-serif.conf DroidSerif*ttf %prep %setup -q -c -T install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE9} notice.txt install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE10} readme.txt %build %install rm -fr %{buildroot} install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE1} %{SOURCE2} %{SOURCE3} %{SOURCE4} %{SOURCE5} \ %{SOURCE6} %{SOURCE7} %{SOURCE8} %{buildroot}%{_fontdir} install -m 0755 -d %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir} install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE11} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/65-%{fontname}-sans.conf install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE12} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/60-%{fontname}-sans-mono.conf install -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE13} \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_templatedir}/59-%{fontname}-serif.conf for fontconf in 59-%{fontname}-sans.conf \ 59-%{fontname}-sans-mono.conf \ 59-%{fontname}-serif.conf ; do ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/$fontconf \ %{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/$fontconf done %clean rm -fr %{buildroot} %files common %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) %doc *.txt %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog * Fri Jan 16 2009 - 1.0.112-2 ??? Convert to new naming guidelines ??? Do strange stuff with Sans Fallback (CJK users please check) * Tue Dec 9 2008 - 1.0.112-1 ?? Licensing bit clarified in bug #472635 ?? Fedora submission * Sun Nov 23 2008 - 1.0.107-1 ?? Initial built using ???fontpackages??? --- NEW FILE import.log --- google-droid-fonts-1_0_112-2_fc11:HEAD:google-droid-fonts-1.0.112-2.fc11.src.rpm:1232143809 Index: .cvsignore =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- .cvsignore 15 Jan 2009 20:27:08 -0000 1.1 +++ .cvsignore 16 Jan 2009 22:10:39 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +DroidSans-Bold.ttf +DroidSans.ttf +DroidSansFallback.ttf +DroidSansMono.ttf +DroidSerif-Bold.ttf +DroidSerif-BoldItalic.ttf +DroidSerif-Italic.ttf +DroidSerif-Regular.ttf Index: sources =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel/sources,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- sources 15 Jan 2009 20:27:08 -0000 1.1 +++ sources 16 Jan 2009 22:10:40 -0000 1.2 @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +2afdf28d5cdd079b41968cdabf1b469e DroidSans-Bold.ttf +6f28ad369fa0f2661cc2de7a7be9977e DroidSans.ttf +4caeadd734f4be9973163bdf02ea6cf5 DroidSansFallback.ttf +3922dfe38a36da7d6edfb1fe77b276fb DroidSansMono.ttf +849a92990a80cbb665bfc74fd03743bd DroidSerif-Bold.ttf +a062025df92affc1331a05b7c07793fc DroidSerif-BoldItalic.ttf +a2e7305a0ba8bb7091124f4cd1485fc9 DroidSerif-Italic.ttf +bfb2f44a7c1deba39f7f4d39bff18eeb DroidSerif-Regular.ttf From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 22:29:51 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:29:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel google-droid-fonts.spec, 1.1, 1.2 import.log, 1.1, 1.2 Message-ID: <20090116222951.E493E70142@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15059/devel Modified Files: google-droid-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: workaround rhel5 rpm bug Index: google-droid-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel/google-droid-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- google-droid-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 22:10:40 -0000 1.1 +++ google-droid-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 22:29:21 -0000 1.2 @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ %define download_root http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=platform/frameworks/base.git;a=blob_plain;f=data/fonts %define common_desc \ -The Droid typeface family was designed in the fall of 2006 by Ascender???s \ +The Droid typeface family was designed in the fall of 2006 by Ascender's \ Steve Matteson, as a commission from Google to create a set of system fonts \ for its Android platform. The goal was to provide optimal quality and comfort \ on a mobile handset when rendered in application menus, web browsers and for \ @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts # The font files all have the same version except for sans fallback which I'm going to ignore here Version: 1.0.112 -Release: 2%{?dist} +Release: 3%{?dist} Summary: General-purpose fonts released by Google as part of Android Group: User Interface/X @@ -143,6 +143,8 @@ %changelog * Fri Jan 16 2009 +- 1.0.112-3 +??? Workaround RHEL5 rpmbuild UTF-8 handling bug - 1.0.112-2 ??? Convert to new naming guidelines ??? Do strange stuff with Sans Fallback (CJK users please check) Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/google-droid-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2 --- import.log 16 Jan 2009 22:10:40 -0000 1.1 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 22:29:21 -0000 1.2 @@ -1 +1,2 @@ google-droid-fonts-1_0_112-2_fc11:HEAD:google-droid-fonts-1.0.112-2.fc11.src.rpm:1232143809 +google-droid-fonts-1_0_112-3_fc11:HEAD:google-droid-fonts-1.0.112-3.fc11.src.rpm:1232144541 From nim at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 16 23:04:31 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:04:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel dejavu-fonts.spec, 1.93, 1.94 import.log, 1.10, 1.11 Message-ID: <20090116230431.8E71370127@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20163/devel Modified Files: dejavu-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: fix lgc-serif obsoletes Index: dejavu-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/dejavu-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.93 retrieving revision 1.94 diff -u -r1.93 -r1.94 --- dejavu-fonts.spec 15 Jan 2009 22:54:37 -0000 1.93 +++ dejavu-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 23:04:00 -0000 1.94 @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 2.28 -Release: 2%{?alphatag}%{?dist} +Release: 3%{?alphatag}%{?dist} Summary: DejaVu fonts Group: User Interface/X @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ Conflicts: dejavu-lgc-fonts < 2.26-3 -Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-sans < 2.28-2 +Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-serif < 2.28-2 %description -n %{fontname}-lgc-serif-fonts %common_desc @@ -256,7 +256,11 @@ %changelog -* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot +* Fri Jan 16 2009 +- 2.28-3 +??? Fix lgc-serif obsoletes + +* Thu Jan 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot - 2.28-2 ??? Update URL ??? update for new naming guidelines Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.10 retrieving revision 1.11 diff -u -r1.10 -r1.11 --- import.log 15 Jan 2009 22:54:38 -0000 1.10 +++ import.log 16 Jan 2009 23:04:00 -0000 1.11 @@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ dejavu-fonts-2_27-7_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.27-7.fc11.src.rpm:1229544635 dejavu-fonts-2_28-1_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-1.fc11.src.rpm:1229879833 dejavu-fonts-2_28-2_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-2.fc11.src.rpm:1232060001 +dejavu-fonts-2_28-3_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-3.fc11.src.rpm:1232147011 From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 23:43:08 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:43:08 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477055] Please drop fonts spec template from rpmdevtools In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901162343.n0GNh8pD007452@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477055 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-16 18:43:06 EDT --- rpmdevtools-7.0-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 23:44:17 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:44:17 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477055] Please drop fonts spec template from rpmdevtools In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901162344.n0GNiHsj024961@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477055 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2009-01-16 18:44:16 EDT --- rpmdevtools-7.0-1.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 23:43:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:43:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477055] Please drop fonts spec template from rpmdevtools In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901162343.n0GNhF0d024698@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477055 Fedora Update System changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From rajeeshknambiar at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 17 05:28:48 2009 From: rajeeshknambiar at fedoraproject.org (Rajeesh K Nambiar) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 05:28:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/smc-fonts/devel smc-fonts.spec,1.3,1.4 Message-ID: <20090117052848.AD99A7012B@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: rajeeshknambiar Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/smc-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1672 Modified Files: smc-fonts.spec Log Message: Update for new font naming guidelines Index: smc-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/smc-fonts/devel/smc-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- smc-fonts.spec 6 Jan 2009 09:30:39 -0000 1.3 +++ smc-fonts.spec 17 Jan 2009 05:28:18 -0000 1.4 @@ -6,16 +6,16 @@ The smc-fonts package contains fonts for the display of\ traditional and new Malayalam Script. -Name: %{fontname}-fonts +Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 04.1 -Release: 2%{?dist} +Release: 3%{?dist} Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script -Group: User Interface/X +Group: User Interface/X License: GPLv3+ with exceptions and GPLv2+ with exceptions and GPLv2+ and GPLv2 -URL: http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/smc -Source: http://download.savannah.nongnu.org/releases/smc/fonts/malayalam-fonts-%{version}.zip +URL: http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/smc +Source: http://download.savannah.nongnu.org/releases/smc/fonts/malayalam-fonts-%{version}.zip BuildArch: noarch -BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel +BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel > 1.13 BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) %description @@ -23,74 +23,81 @@ %package common Summary: Common files for smc-fonts -Group: User Interface/X +Group: User Interface/X Requires: fontpackages-filesystem %description common %common_desc -%package dyuthi +%package -n %{fontname}-dyuthi-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions -%description dyuthi +Obsoletes: %{name}-dyuthi < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-dyuthi-fonts The smc-fonts-dyuthi package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. -%package meera +%package -n %{fontname}-meera-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2+ with exceptions -%description meera +Obsoletes: %{name}-meera < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-meera-fonts The smc-fonts-meera package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. -%package rachana +%package -n %{fontname}-rachana-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2+ -%description rachana +Obsoletes: %{name}-rachana < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-rachana-fonts The smc-fonts-rachana package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. -%package raghumalayalam +%package -n %{fontname}-raghumalayalam-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv2 -%description raghumalayalam +Obsoletes: %{name}-raghumalayalam < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-raghumalayalam-fonts The smc-fonts-malayalam package contains fonts for the display of new Malayalam Scripts. -%package suruma +%package -n %{fontname}-suruma-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions -%description suruma +Obsoletes: %{name}-suruma < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-suruma-fonts The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. -%package kalyani +%package -n %{fontname}-kalyani-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions -%description kalyani +Obsoletes: %{name}-kalyani < 04-1.3 +%description -n %{fontname}-kalyani-fonts The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of new Malayalam Scripts. -%package anjalioldlipi +%package -n %{fontname}-anjalioldlipi-fonts Summary: Open Type Fonts for Malayalam script Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} License: GPLv3+ with exceptions -%description anjalioldlipi +Obsoletes: %{name}-anjalioldlipi < 04.1-3 +%description -n %{fontname}-anjalioldlipi-fonts The smc-fonts-suruma package contains fonts for the display of traditional Malayalam Scripts. @@ -137,6 +144,9 @@ %dir %{_fontdir} %changelog +* Sat Jan 17 2009 Rajeesh K Nambiar 04.1-3 +- update for new font guidelines + * Tue Jan 06 2009 Pravin Satpute 04.1-2 - bugfix 477458 - updated spec From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 05:52:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 00:52:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477458] Please convert to new font packaging guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901170552.n0H5qEEd023367@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477458 --- Comment #5 from Rajeesh 2009-01-17 00:52:13 EDT --- spec is updated, and Koji has built the rawhide packages successfully. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 17 07:57:03 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:57:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-cm-lgc Message-ID: <20090117075703.BDCFA1F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-cm-lgc has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On x86_64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On i386: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts On ppc64: tetex-font-cm-lgc-0.5-11.fc11.noarch requires cm-lgc-fonts Please resolve this as soon as possible. From buildsys at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 17 07:57:05 2009 From: buildsys at fedoraproject.org (buildsys at fedoraproject.org) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:57:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Broken dependencies: tetex-font-kerkis Message-ID: <20090117075705.B8CC51F825D@releng2.fedora.phx.redhat.com> tetex-font-kerkis has broken dependencies in the development tree: On ppc: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On x86_64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On i386: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 On ppc64: tetex-font-kerkis-2.0-16.fc11.noarch requires kerkis-fonts = 0:2.0-16.fc11 Please resolve this as soon as possible. From nmailhot at openoffice.org Sat Jan 17 11:07:48 2009 From: nmailhot at openoffice.org (nmailhot at openoffice.org) Date: 17 Jan 2009 11:07:48 -0000 Subject: [Issue 98139] Interaction of font-fallback and font-replacement table In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090117110748.23956.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=98139 User nmailhot changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'' |'fedorafonts' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From nmailhot at openoffice.org Sat Jan 17 11:07:48 2009 From: nmailhot at openoffice.org (nmailhot at openoffice.org) Date: 17 Jan 2009 11:07:48 -0000 Subject: [Issue 98139] Interaction of font-fallback and font-replacement table In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090117110748.23956.qmail@openoffice.org> To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=98139 User nmailhot changed the following: What |Old value |New value ================================================================================ CC|'' |'fedorafonts' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification From nim at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 17 11:42:43 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 11:42:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel ecolier-court-fonts.spec, 1.4, 1.5 import.log, 1.4, 1.5 Message-ID: <20090117114243.33C877012B@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv8651/devel Modified Files: ecolier-court-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: add missing obsoletes Index: ecolier-court-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/ecolier-court-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- ecolier-court-fonts.spec 16 Jan 2009 21:13:43 -0000 1.4 +++ ecolier-court-fonts.spec 17 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0000 1.5 @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ Group: User Interface/X Requires: %{name}-common = %{version}-%{release} +Obsoletes: %{name}-lignes < 20070702-7 + %description -n %{fontname}-lignes-fonts %common_desc @@ -109,8 +111,8 @@ %changelog -* Fri Jan 16 2009 -- 20070702-6 +* Sat Jan 17 2009 +- 20070702-7 ??? Convert to new naming guidelines * Wed Dec 17 2008 Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- import.log 16 Jan 2009 21:13:43 -0000 1.4 +++ import.log 17 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0000 1.5 @@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-4_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-4.fc11.src.rpm:1229541673 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5.fc11.src.rpm:1229543899 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6.fc11.src.rpm:1232140382 +ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6.fc11.src.rpm:1232192497 From nim at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 17 12:03:11 2009 From: nim at fedoraproject.org (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:03:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel ecolier-court-fonts.spec, 1.5, 1.6 import.log, 1.5, 1.6 Message-ID: <20090117120311.349277012B@cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com> Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv12432/devel Modified Files: ecolier-court-fonts.spec import.log Log Message: add missing obsoletes Index: ecolier-court-fonts.spec =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/ecolier-court-fonts.spec,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- ecolier-court-fonts.spec 17 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0000 1.5 +++ ecolier-court-fonts.spec 17 Jan 2009 12:02:40 -0000 1.6 @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Name: %{fontname}-fonts Version: 20070702 -Release: 6%{?dist} +Release: 7%{?dist} Summary: Schoolchildren cursive fonts Group: User Interface/X Index: import.log =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/ecolier-court-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.5 retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6 --- import.log 17 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0000 1.5 +++ import.log 17 Jan 2009 12:02:40 -0000 1.6 @@ -3,3 +3,4 @@ ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-5.fc11.src.rpm:1229543899 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6.fc11.src.rpm:1232140382 ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-6.fc11.src.rpm:1232192497 +ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-7_fc11:HEAD:ecolier-court-fonts-20070702-7.fc11.src.rpm:1232193736 From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 12:25:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 477044] [Tracker] Deploy new font packaging guidelines for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171225.n0HCPh9O023917@bz-web1.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477044 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480443 Bug 477044 depends on bug 477055, which changed state. Bug 477055 Summary: Please drop fonts spec template from rpmdevtools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477055 What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 12:25:42 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:25:42 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] New: [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines Message-ID: Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines Alias: F11-new-font-naming https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Summary: [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_pac kage_naming_(2009-01-13) OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: distribution AssignedTo: notting at redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net QAContact: notting at redhat.com CC: katzj at redhat.com, jkeating at redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com Blocks: 477044 Classification: Fedora FPC unexpectedly refused to approve a proposal that put into writing the package naming rules for fonts Fedora had been using in the past years, and made us change it. Deal with the fallout. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_%28FAQ%29#fpc_renaming The revised font naming rules are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0r2P013834@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480448 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:22 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1MUH014398@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480456 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:58 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:58 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0w7i013936@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480450 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:49 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:49 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0nFV013732@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480446 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:51 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:51 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0pdn013782@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480447 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0jFZ013632@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480444 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0uk8013886@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480449 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1GlC014275@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480454 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:02 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:02 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD12Gh014038@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480452 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD14PS014085@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480453 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:47 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:47 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0lCT013683@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480445 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:24 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:24 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1OtK014452@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480457 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:27 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:27 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1Rw7014509@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480458 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:19 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:19 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1JtX014333@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480455 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:29 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:29 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1T42014562@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480459 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:00 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:00 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD10ff013985@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480451 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:57 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:57 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480450] [fbida] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0vSf013911@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480450 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:56 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480455] [ftgl] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1I0P014302@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480455 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:17 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480451] [feh] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0xhk013959@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480451 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:58 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:21 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:21 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480456] [gnubg] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1LcN014372@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480456 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:20 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480454] [freedink] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1AZd014218@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480454 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:04 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:23 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:23 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480457] [gramps] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1NK0014420@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480457 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:22 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:03 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480453] [foobillard] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD13Co014060@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480453 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:02 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480447] [e16-docs] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0oST013756@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480447 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:49 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480444] [blender] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0hD3013601@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480444 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:42 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480446] [e16] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0mJa013706@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480446 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:47 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:55 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:55 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480449] [ember-media] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0trT013860@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480449 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:54 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:28 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:28 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480459] [libprojectM] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1SA1014534@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480459 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:27 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:25 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:25 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480458] [hedgewars] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1PCM014480@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480458 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:24 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:46 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:46 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480445] [cinepaint] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0kBI013656@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480445 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:45 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:00:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480448] [egoboo-data] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171300.n0HD0qKV013808@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480448 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:00:51 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:30 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:30 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480460] [lincity-ng] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1Ut5014588@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480460 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:29 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480452] [fillets-ng-data] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD11q5014007@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480452 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:00 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:43 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:43 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1hPj015087@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480465 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:01 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2172015595@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480472 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:35 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:35 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1Z78014746@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480462 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:48 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:48 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1mI9015300@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480467 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:50 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:50 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1o3l015364@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480468 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:45 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:45 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1jh0015192@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480466 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:04 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD241L015650@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480473 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:18 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:18 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2IdI015916@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480481 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:39 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:39 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1d68014956@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480464 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:56 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:56 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1uXa015481@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480470 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:59 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:59 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1xBr015540@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480471 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:37 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1b2B014857@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480463 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:16 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:16 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2GfQ015869@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480480 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:11 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:11 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2BuN015779@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480477 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:53 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:53 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480443] [Tracker] Deploy new fonts package naming guidelines In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1rjv015417@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480443 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |480469 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:36 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:36 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480463] [munin] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1apE014821@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480463 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:35 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:32 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:32 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480461] [mapnik] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1WSJ014634@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480461 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:31 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:14 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:14 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480479] [wormux] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2EZA015825@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480479 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:13 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:15 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:15 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480480] [xmoto] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2F5l015849@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480480 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:15 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:41 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:41 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480465] [ogre] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1fVJ015023@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480465 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:40 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:12 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:12 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480478] [vodovod] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2Cii015806@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480478 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:11 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:52 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:52 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480469] [plplot] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1qGe015399@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480469 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:51 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:33 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:33 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480462] [mapserver] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1X18014691@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480462 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:33 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:01:38 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:01:38 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480464] [neverball] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171301.n0HD1cSP014913@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480464 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:01:38 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:10 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:10 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480477] [vdr-skins] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD2A6r015757@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480477 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:10 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:09 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:09 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480476] [trackballs] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD29rw015737@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480476 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:08 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F To ease the transition and avoid breaking F11 Alpha DejaVu has already been renamed but still declares its old names for full via rpm Provides. Those provides will be removed for Fedora 11 beta, to ensure no remaining legacy deps remains in the distribution. In the meanwhile packages depending on DejaVu full won't break and can be adapted at your leasure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. From bugzilla at redhat.com Sat Jan 17 13:02:07 2009 From: bugzilla at redhat.com (bugzilla at redhat.com) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:02:07 -0500 Subject: [Bug 480475] [TnL-data] Adapt to font package renamings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200901171302.n0HD27VD015712@bz-web2.app.phx.redhat.com> Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480475 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redh | |at.com Blocks| |480443 Flag| |needinfo? --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-01-17 08:02:06 EDT --- FPC unexpectedly refused to ratify a proposal that put into writing our de-facto font package naming rules for the past years, and requested naming changes. As a result many font packages have been or will be renamed soon (including recently created packages) We have detected your package depends on such a font package. Please change your dependencies accordingly. See also ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#fpc_renaming ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_(2009-01-13) ? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_Fedora_(FAQ)#What_if_my_package_bundles_Bitstream_Vera.2C_Arev.2C_DejaVu_LGC_or_another_Bitstream_Vera_font_derivative.3F