Problems detected in the bpg-fonts rawhide package!

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Dear packager,

At 20091029T192211Z, while scanning the rawhide repository located at:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/static-repos/dist-rawhide-current/x86_64/
I have identified the following problems in your bpg-fonts package:

SRPM       RPM                         6  17
bpg-fonts  bpg-algeti-fonts            ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-chveulebrivi-fonts      ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-courier-fonts           ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-courier-s-fonts         ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-elite-fonts             ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-excelsior-fonts         ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-glaho-fonts             ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-ingiri-fonts            ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-nino-medium-cond-fonts  1  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-nino-medium-fonts       1  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-sans-fonts              ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-sans-medium-fonts       1  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-sans-modern-fonts       ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-sans-regular-fonts      1  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-serif-fonts             ‧  1
bpg-fonts  bpg-serif-modern-fonts      ‧  1
           Total                       4  16

6. Fonts that declare style attributes in family names

    ☛ To be properly processed by applications face qualifiers need to be
    declared in style names. Some application stacks such as Microsoft WPF will
    try to workaround bad font naming with dynamic renaming heuristics¹, but
    heuristics are brittle and pose interoperability problems with applications
    that do not use them.
    
    If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
    naming so it respects WWS conventions and does not need further
    reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch it (if it is available in sfd
    format) or add a fontconfig rule to your package to hide the problem².
    
    There may be a few false positives in this test as some common face
    qualifiers can be used with a different meaning in family names.
    
    ¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
    http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
    http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20&%20OT%2015.pdf
    ² cf the “fontpackages” remapping template; unfortunately this workaround
    won't fix problems for non-fontconfig applications, or when interoperating
    with other systems.


17. Fonts with partial script coverage

    ☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to be
    accepted by fontconfig as covering one or several scripts. Therefore they
    could be made useful to more people with only a little effort.
    
    To check a font file script coverage, run fc-query with FC_DEBUG=256 and
    look for lines like: script-id¹(number) { list-of-unicode-codepoints }
    
    For example “mi(2) { 1e34 1e35 }” means fontconfig will accept the tested
    file for Maori if codepoints 1e34 and 1e35 are added.
    
    If you feel fontconfig is requiring a glyph which is not strictly necessary
    for a particular script, report the problem upstream².
    
    ¹ http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php
    ² https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=fontconfig

Please take the appropriate measures to fix the bpg-fonts package.

I will warn you again if I find problems next time I am ran.

Your friendly QA robot,

-- 
repo-font-audit
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/fontpackages
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bpg-fonts.tar.xz
Type: application/x-xz-compressed-tar
Size: 23320 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-fonts-bugs-list/attachments/20091029/c7f35abb/attachment.bin>