From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Tue Apr 1 13:24:37 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:24:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: New Location For Lohit Fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7403.192.54.193.52.1207056277.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Lun 31 mars 2008 16:04, Rahul Bhalerao a ?crit : > Hi all, > > The Lohit fonts project hereon will be hosted on fedorahosted.org. > Following is the new homepage of the project: > https://www.fedorahosted.org/lohit > > This had to be done since the previous location i.e. wiki on > fedoraproject.org had many limitations. Great news, I hope this will motivate the other l*n Red Hat font project to move to fedorahosted too. Feel free to correct or expand the redirection on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Dev Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From yaneti at declera.com Wed Apr 2 14:43:49 2008 From: yaneti at declera.com (Yanko Kaneti) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 14:43:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: No fc-match for serif, sans-serif, mono with only liberation-fonts Message-ID: Hi Rawhide. With installed only liberation-fonts, I was surprised to see fc-match not returning anything for "serif", "sans-serif", "mono". Is that a bug? (I think it should be). If it is, where? fontconfig? liberation-fonts ? Yanko From b.rahul.pm at gmail.com Wed Apr 2 18:23:28 2008 From: b.rahul.pm at gmail.com (Rahul Bhalerao) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 23:53:28 +0530 Subject: No fc-match for serif, sans-serif, mono with only liberation-fonts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Yanko Kaneti wrote: > Hi > > Rawhide. With installed only liberation-fonts, I was surprised to see > fc-match not returning anything for "serif", "sans-serif", "mono". > > Is that a bug? (I think it should be). You need to provide complete font name to fc-match to get any results. In this case it would be like: $ fc-match Liberation\ Sans LiberationSans-Regular.ttf: "Liberation Sans" "Regular" Still the question is, why the exact name, can't we use wild characters or something like that? _ Rahul. From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Tue Apr 8 11:23:20 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 13:23:20 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Packaging a font for Linux In-Reply-To: <44f12b0e0804080403n2f8af060h31291a5e25c959c8@mail.gmail.com> References: <44f12b0e0804071530h9f3178n4553ec13b7c622c0@mail.gmail.com> <200804081236.00012.benlaenen@gmail.com> <44f12b0e0804080403n2f8af060h31291a5e25c959c8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <23782.192.54.193.59.1207653800.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Mar 8 avril 2008 13:03, Erdal Ronahi a ?crit : > Hi Davide, hi Nicholas, Hi Erdal, > I am the head of the Kurdish l10n group for free software. Ben Laenen > was so > kind to give me your emails. I am asking for help with packaging and > distributing a font for Linux. [...] > What we > are not familiar with is how to package this font and get major > distributions like Debian or Fedora to accept it into their > repositories. > Should we file a bug for that, if so where, or can you two help us > directly? The Fedora font teams dwells at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts You'll find here quite a lot of packaging documentation, and the page on which new font packaging requests are registered. However since our number of font packagers is currently very small, I much prefer forming new font packagers than packaging new fonts directly (we already have a huge backlog). It's a win-win - you learn how to package new kurdish fonts and push your font updates quickly, we get new fonts in Fedora without putting more burden on the existing font packaging team. If you have one or several people that have fedora installed we can arrange some font mentoring session on ##fonts one week-end (or evening CET time). Otherwise if you prefer I can also help you through the get-it-packaged-by-someone-else process, but it can be a lot longer given the current packager pool. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From cannewilson at googlemail.com Tue Apr 8 11:59:58 2008 From: cannewilson at googlemail.com (Anne Wilson) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 12:59:58 +0100 Subject: Tracing the origin of a font Message-ID: <200804081259.58815.cannewilson@googlemail.com> How would you go about finding who owns the copyright to a font? I'm wondering whether I could find the owners of a few rather nice fonts and talk to them about open-sourcing. Anne -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: From simos.lists at googlemail.com Tue Apr 8 12:04:16 2008 From: simos.lists at googlemail.com (Simos Xenitellis) Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:04:16 +0100 Subject: Tracing the origin of a font In-Reply-To: <200804081259.58815.cannewilson@googlemail.com> References: <200804081259.58815.cannewilson@googlemail.com> Message-ID: <47FB5F40.6040709@googlemail.com> Anne Wilson wrote: > How would you go about finding who owns the copyright to a font? I'm > wondering whether I could find the owners of a few rather nice fonts and talk > to them about open-sourcing. > Most probably the font would have some information about the designer in the file itself. This information is inside the font file. In GNOME, if you right-click on the font file, you get the option to open the font in gnome-font-viewer. You can also extract the same information if you open the font in fontforge. Simos From dave at lab6.com Tue Apr 8 12:18:38 2008 From: dave at lab6.com (Dave Crossland) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 13:18:38 +0100 Subject: Tracing the origin of a font In-Reply-To: <200804081259.58815.cannewilson@googlemail.com> References: <200804081259.58815.cannewilson@googlemail.com> Message-ID: <2285a9d20804080518r31208dcdqa9f1ca8f66f7f899@mail.gmail.com> On 08/04/2008, Anne Wilson wrote: > > How would you go about finding who owns the copyright to a font? Try opening the font in FontForge and inspecting the FontInfo :-) If there are no details there, try searching on myfonts.com/whatthefont and dafont.com... > I'm wondering whether I could find the owners of a few rather nice > fonts and talk to them about open-sourcing. Please try suggesting the Open Font License :-) -- Regards, Dave From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Wed Apr 9 14:29:19 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 16:29:19 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Packaging Unikurd Web font for Debian In-Reply-To: <44f12b0e0804090712i3726bad7kc5185067c55cb42a@mail.gmail.com> References: <44f12b0e0804080859t7c4af9ebs357fc89444b18c45@mail.gmail.com> <20080409070157.GP2158@zinosat.homelinux.com> <44f12b0e0804090712i3726bad7kc5185067c55cb42a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20209.192.54.193.59.1207751359.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Hi all, Everyone seems to forget the Fedora Kurd users, but anyway, I'll try again. We have very similar packaging resources than Debian (only better :p) including: 1. Mailing list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts#ML 2. Documentation http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts 3. Packaging guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Packaging/SpecTemplate 4. Packaging examples (any -fonts package in http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/devel/ ) And I renew my offer to walk one or several members of the Kurdish l10n group through Fedora packaging on the ##fonts irc channel if needed. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Apr 10 07:34:14 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:34:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Packaging Unikurd Web font for Debian In-Reply-To: <44f12b0e0804092005p31ca5849r6187688943ec1310@mail.gmail.com> References: <44f12b0e0804080859t7c4af9ebs357fc89444b18c45@mail.gmail.com> <20080409070157.GP2158@zinosat.homelinux.com> <44f12b0e0804090712i3726bad7kc5185067c55cb42a@mail.gmail.com> <20209.192.54.193.59.1207751359.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <44f12b0e0804092005p31ca5849r6187688943ec1310@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <60529.192.54.193.59.1207812854.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Jeu 10 avril 2008 05:05, Erdal Ronahi a ?crit : > Hi all, > > Everyone seems to forget the Fedora Kurd users, but anyway, I'll try > > > I'm not forgetting them, I just don't know any. The Kurdish Linux > community > is pretty much an Ubuntu Community as far as I am aware. If you have any user of CentOS, RHEL or OLPC they all reuse Fedora packages. >> again. We have very similar packaging resources than Debian (only >> better :p) including: > > > Is there any chance that packaging for one distribution (Fedora or > Debian) will spare me packaging it for the other? None at all, unfortunately (well everyone tends to copy what's in RHEL, but that's no decent sharing). Deb-based distributions with copy debs of other distributions, rpm-based distributions will copy rpms of other distributions, but you still need to make sure there is one of both to have correct user coverage. However, while the packaging steps are a little different, you'll be asked pretty much the same things Debian and Fedora side. > I remember packaging a dictionary > years ago (for Debian) and found it difficult. I've always considered rpm friendlier on the packager side, but I'm obviously biased. > Later I was happy to see that > somebody had made a RPM from it without contribution from me. > Is something similar possible for fonts? You can always hope, but there is no guaranty that it will happen soon. -- Nicolas Mailhot From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 13 08:59:52 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:59:52 +0200 Subject: Packaging Unikurd Web font for Debian In-Reply-To: <60529.192.54.193.59.1207812854.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <44f12b0e0804080859t7c4af9ebs357fc89444b18c45@mail.gmail.com> <20080409070157.GP2158@zinosat.homelinux.com> <44f12b0e0804090712i3726bad7kc5185067c55cb42a@mail.gmail.com> <20209.192.54.193.59.1207751359.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <44f12b0e0804092005p31ca5849r6187688943ec1310@mail.gmail.com> <60529.192.54.193.59.1207812854.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1208077194.25364.3.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le jeudi 10 avril 2008 ? 09:34 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot a ?crit : > Le Jeu 10 avril 2008 05:05, Erdal Ronahi a ?crit : > > Is there any chance that packaging for one distribution (Fedora or > > Debian) will spare me packaging it for the other? > > None at all, unfortunately Also, since http://www.kurditgroup.org/node/1337 is in kurd, I don't see how anyone but a kurd could package this. We don't blindly take material from the web without having some sort of context. PS I don't see anything like the FSF font exception in the zipped license. -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From moyogo at gmail.com Sun Apr 13 16:34:29 2008 From: moyogo at gmail.com (Denis Jacquerye) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:34:29 +0200 Subject: Liberation fonts Message-ID: <8ebc61110804130934g698fead2g5f491bc8df2f13e9@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I want to extend Liberation fonts to support African languages in Latin script. Would it be possible to have some CVS access and have bug tracking on the Bugzilla to allow community involvment in the devlopment of the fonts? Cheers, -- Denis Moyogo Jacquerye --- http://home.sus.mcgill.ca/~moyogo Nk?t? ya Kong? m?bal? --- http://info-langues-congo.1sd.org/ DejaVu fonts --- http://dejavu.sourceforge.net/ Unicode (UTF-8) From dave at lab6.com Sun Apr 13 17:22:14 2008 From: dave at lab6.com (Dave Crossland) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:22:14 +0100 Subject: Liberation fonts In-Reply-To: <8ebc61110804130934g698fead2g5f491bc8df2f13e9@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ebc61110804130934g698fead2g5f491bc8df2f13e9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2285a9d20804131022t38d426fci11e4796d33b3f653@mail.gmail.com> On 13/04/2008, Denis Jacquerye wrote: > > I want to extend Liberation fonts to support African languages in Latin script. > Would it be possible to have some CVS access and have bug tracking on > the Bugzilla to allow community involvment in the devlopment of the > fonts? Ascender is still developing them btw -- Regards, Dave From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 13 19:09:26 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:09:26 +0200 Subject: Packagekit font autoinstall [was Re: Some packagekit feedback] In-Reply-To: <1208111998.9514.11.camel@hughsie-work> References: <1208089029.27103.40.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1208111998.9514.11.camel@hughsie-work> Message-ID: <1208113766.3612.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 13 avril 2008 ? 19:39 +0100, Richard Hughes a ?crit : > On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 14:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > ?????? help users install the right fonts on their system: > > ?????? when a user encounters some script (in its browser, office > > suite, etc) the system can not render due to lack of fonts the > > application used could propose installing the needed font packages > > (probably needs work with Behdad to write an helper that auto-adds the > > needed Provides to font packages at build time) > > Sure, we can install them trivially. See > http://hughsient.livejournal.com/55964.html It's not trivial because current packages do not have the necessary metadata. And the install-fonts-by-style is yet another thing. But since this metadata would be pretty useless for humans and only makes sense in a packagekit-like context, you have a chicken and egg problem. > > This is something that would help a huge number of users, much more than > > codec plugins ever will. It would probably justify the whole packagekit > > infrastructure alone. > > Okay, lets make this happen. Could you join the packagekit mailing list > and we'll discuss there how it can be done. I think it's perfectly in > the scope of packagekit, although we don't want to re-implement this in > every application that wants to use pango. Actually, it's every application that uses fontconfig (Behdad is also Fedora's fontconfig man). Which is a huge application base, so you'd need a big generic part and a small application-specific glue. > If you cc Behdad we can all > talk on the same hymn sheet. CC done -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 13 19:48:19 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 21:48:19 +0200 Subject: Liberation fonts In-Reply-To: <2285a9d20804131022t38d426fci11e4796d33b3f653@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ebc61110804130934g698fead2g5f491bc8df2f13e9@mail.gmail.com> <2285a9d20804131022t38d426fci11e4796d33b3f653@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1208116099.3612.40.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 13 avril 2008 ? 18:22 +0100, Dave Crossland a ?crit : > On 13/04/2008, Denis Jacquerye wrote: > > > > I want to extend Liberation fonts to support African languages in Latin script. > > Would it be possible to have some CVS access and have bug tracking on > > the Bugzilla to allow community involvment in the devlopment of the > > fonts? > > Ascender is still developing them btw And Liberation is RedHat-side. But since the RH-publishing process for Liberation is a huge mess, Fedora has proposed hosting Liberation. This should give us proper VCS & bug tracker if it's accepted. However while ?Ascender is working on the fonts I doubt patches will be merged in. And since Red Hat had big ambitions for Liberation, Ascender may work on them a for long time. If you're envisaging significant contributions your best bet is probably to do a DejaVu on Liberation: set up a separate project, do your changes there, and merge back Ascender font drops every time they happen. -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sun Apr 13 20:09:51 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:09:51 +0200 Subject: Packagekit font autoinstall [was Re: Some packagekit feedback] In-Reply-To: <1208115743.9514.16.camel@hughsie-work> References: <1208089029.27103.40.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1208111998.9514.11.camel@hughsie-work> <1208113766.3612.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <1208115743.9514.16.camel@hughsie-work> Message-ID: <1208117391.3612.43.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le dimanche 13 avril 2008 ? 20:42 +0100, Richard Hughes a ?crit : > On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 21:09 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le dimanche 13 avril 2008 ? 19:39 +0100, Richard Hughes a ?crit : > > > On Sun, 2008-04-13 at 14:17 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > > > > ?????? help users install the right fonts on their system: > > > > ?????? when a user encounters some script (in its browser, office > > > > suite, etc) the system can not render due to lack of fonts the > > > > application used could propose installing the needed font packages > > > > (probably needs work with Behdad to write an helper that auto-adds the > > > > needed Provides to font packages at build time) > > > > > > Sure, we can install them trivially. See > > > http://hughsient.livejournal.com/55964.html > > > > It's not trivial because current packages do not have the necessary > > metadata. And the install-fonts-by-style is yet another thing. But since > > this metadata would be pretty useless for humans and only makes sense in > > a packagekit-like context, you have a chicken and egg problem. > > Well, yes and no. Bastien wrote a script to auto-add the codec metadata > as provides in the spec file, so now we can install the right codec by > querying the provides. Can we not do the same thing with font-styles? > It's three lines of code to install a package from a provides using > gnome-packagekit. That's what I was proposing. But I suspect a good auto-provider would be non-trivial, which is why having Behdad in the boat would be good. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From notting at redhat.com Fri Apr 18 19:57:09 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:57:09 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list Message-ID: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. 1) Fonts not used by any fontconfig app. I don't think we ship any apps that aren't fontconfig users on the livecd (and if we do, we shouldn't...) 7140551 xorg-x11-fonts-misc 3417965 xorg-x11-fonts-100dpi 1070826 xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-1-100dpi 1066029 xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-9-100dpi 301748 fonts-KOI8-R-100dpi 2) Bitmap fonts, which almost certainly won't be pulled in by fontconfig by default. 27332191 fonts-japanese 9241059 baekmuk-bdf-fonts 7049492 bitmap-fonts 1970046 taipeifonts 3) Everything else. These are probably OK. :) 20925196 cjkunifonts-uming 17639727 cjkunifonts-ukai 15613489 dejavu-fonts 13939722 baekmuk-ttf-fonts-batang 10385374 baekmuk-ttf-fonts-gulim 3831790 VLGothic-fonts-proportional 3831447 VLGothic-fonts 3066338 baekmuk-ttf-fonts-dotum 3008781 thaifonts-scalable 2002144 culmus-fonts 1865190 liberation-fonts 1271487 kacst-fonts 1203754 baekmuk-ttf-fonts-hline 966835 paktype-fonts 883992 xorg-x11-fonts-Type1 775248 stix-fonts 270427 sarai-fonts 177606 lohit-fonts-telugu 162025 samyak-fonts-devanagari 157561 samyak-fonts-oriya 157390 lohit-fonts-bengali 137277 samyak-fonts-gujarati 113638 lohit-fonts-oriya 97894 lohit-fonts-gujarati 96778 lohit-fonts-hindi 85301 samyak-fonts-tamil 83406 lohit-fonts-tamil 82905 samyak-fonts-malayalam 79482 lohit-fonts-malayalam 39898 lohit-fonts-punjabi Bill From katzj at redhat.com Fri Apr 18 19:59:30 2008 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:59:30 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. Yes a lot of space in general ends up being used by fonts. I'd lean towards saying we should make things optional in comps rather than making explicit changes to the livecd, though from a maintenance point of view. Although I guess if we wanted to do it first on the livecd for F9 and then in general for F10 via comps, that'd be okay Jeremy From notting at redhat.com Fri Apr 18 20:04:39 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:04:39 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: <20080418200439.GA13803@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Jeremy Katz (katzj at redhat.com) said: > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. > > Yes a lot of space in general ends up being used by fonts. I'd lean > towards saying we should make things optional in comps rather than > making explicit changes to the livecd, though from a maintenance point > of view. Although I guess if we wanted to do it first on the livecd for > F9 and then in general for F10 via comps, that'd be okay Well, things like 'these fonts are only useful outside of fontconfig', or 'only really used for various terminal emulators' are decisions probably best left to the spin, not to the generic comps. Bill From katzj at redhat.com Fri Apr 18 20:05:28 2008 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:05:28 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <20080418200439.GA13803@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> <20080418200439.GA13803@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1208549128.17368.11.camel@aglarond.local> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 16:04 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jeremy Katz (katzj at redhat.com) said: > > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > > > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > > > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > > > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. > > > > Yes a lot of space in general ends up being used by fonts. I'd lean > > towards saying we should make things optional in comps rather than > > making explicit changes to the livecd, though from a maintenance point > > of view. Although I guess if we wanted to do it first on the livecd for > > F9 and then in general for F10 via comps, that'd be okay > > Well, things like 'these fonts are only useful outside of fontconfig', > or 'only really used for various terminal emulators' are decisions > probably best left to the spin, not to the generic comps. If the apps not using fontconfig aren't marked as defaults, then it's probably not unreasonable. At least the bitmap fonts, we should probably finally take the plunge with Jeremy From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Fri Apr 18 21:13:20 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:13:20 +0200 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le vendredi 18 avril 2008 ? 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham a ?crit : > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. My advice would be: 1. drop every core fonts package except one to keep legacy users happy (probably ?xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-15-100dpi) ?2. drop xorg-x11-fonts-Type1. Nothing in there not provided by more modern font packages ?3. fonts-japanese is probably not 100% necessary when VLGothic is available 4. drop culmus ? DejaVu full includes Hebrew no one complained of during the F9 cycle, so no need to keep a separate Hebrew font on a space-constrained media 5. Have the Arabic l10n group choose between kacst and paktype 6. Have the Indic l10n group sort the huge number of indic fonts, keeping only one package per script (sarai, lohit, smc, samyak) 7. Have the Chinese l10n group choose between cjkunifonts-uming and cjkunifonts-ukai 8. add dejavu-fonts-experimental ? you *really* want the distro default fonts to have a complete face set, a lot of users will notice and complain otherwise I'm afraid most wins are in 3. 5. 6. & 7., and they depend on l10n groups telling us their wishes, which unfortunately has not happened a lot so far. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Triaging/L10N remains terribly incomplete. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From behdad at behdad.org Fri Apr 18 21:22:53 2008 From: behdad at behdad.org (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:22:53 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <1208553773.17763.2.camel@behdad.behdad.org> On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 23:13 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le vendredi 18 avril 2008 ? 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham a ?crit : > > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. > > My advice would be: I pretty much second everything Nicolas said. behdad > 1. drop every core fonts package except one to keep legacy users happy > (probably ?xorg-x11-fonts-ISO8859-15-100dpi) > > ?2. drop xorg-x11-fonts-Type1. Nothing in there not provided by more > modern font packages > > ?3. fonts-japanese is probably not 100% necessary when VLGothic is > available > > 4. drop culmus ? DejaVu full includes Hebrew no one complained of during > the F9 cycle, so no need to keep a separate Hebrew font on a > space-constrained media > > 5. Have the Arabic l10n group choose between kacst and paktype > > 6. Have the Indic l10n group sort the huge number of indic fonts, > keeping only one package per script (sarai, lohit, smc, samyak) > > 7. Have the Chinese l10n group choose between cjkunifonts-uming and > cjkunifonts-ukai > > 8. add dejavu-fonts-experimental ? you *really* want the distro default > fonts to have a complete face set, a lot of users will notice and > complain otherwise > > I'm afraid most wins are in 3. 5. 6. & 7., and they depend on l10n > groups telling us their wishes, which unfortunately has not happened a > lot so far. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Triaging/L10N > remains terribly incomplete. > > Regards, > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- behdad http://behdad.org/ "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Fri Apr 18 22:24:51 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:24:51 +0200 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <480912C4.803@fedoraproject.org> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <480912C4.803@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1208557491.3981.1.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 19 avril 2008 ? 02:59 +0530, Rahul Sundaram a ?crit : > Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > > 6. Have the Indic l10n group sort the huge number of indic fonts, > > keeping only one package per script (sarai, lohit, smc, samyak) > > Lohit is what we prefer by default for Indic. Everything else can be > deemed optional. Since they're all broken up by scripts now you probably want to be more specific, unless lohit provides every needed indic script and none of the others is necessary for coverage. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 19 08:02:36 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 10:02:36 +0200 Subject: Enhancing the fonts list for the KDE live images (was: Re: pruning the fonts list) In-Reply-To: <20080419003627.5e52ae31@deadbabylon.de> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <20080419003627.5e52ae31@deadbabylon.de> Message-ID: <1208592156.26226.6.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 19 avril 2008 ? 00:36 +0200, Sebastian Vahl a ?crit : > I've got a similar question here for the KDE live images. At the moment > our fonts list is: At first glance you could use pretty much the same advice as the live spin, except you've already followed some of it, and you have support for some scripts the main live spin is missing (which is good, if you have the space). For example : tibetan & ethiopic (abyssinica). If you really wanted to save space, you could drop the urw & ghoscript fonts, but I suspect you may have some packages depending on them explicitely. They don't add coverage, and they're not really good screen font, but they do provide some standard font metrics (is it worth some live cd space?) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 19 08:08:02 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 10:08:02 +0200 Subject: Sazanami and VLGothic fonts In-Reply-To: <48092448.3070308@redhat.com> References: <48092448.3070308@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1208592482.26226.10.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le vendredi 18 avril 2008 ? 18:44 -0400, Warren Togami a ?crit : > I noticed the description of the VLGothic fonts package. > > " > VLGothic provides Japanese TrueType fonts from the Vine Linux project. > Most of the glyphs are taken from the M+ and Sazanami Gothic fonts, > but some have also been improved by the project. > " > > Does this mean that VLGothic is a superset of Sazanami? > (Could these be considered redundant fonts taking up space > unnecessarily? I'm guessing not, but just checking to be sure.) ?VLGothic is the new japanese default. That means every other japanese font could be dropped on a space-constrained media IMHO. If the other variants have not been dropped from Fedora Everything they're probably useful to someone. -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Sat Apr 19 09:23:14 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 11:23:14 +0200 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <200804191131.57409.oron@actcom.co.il> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> <200804191131.57409.oron@actcom.co.il> Message-ID: <1208596994.27938.8.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le samedi 19 avril 2008 ? 11:31 +0300, Oron Peled a ?crit : > [cross-posting to an Israeli Group of Linux Users. > IGLU readers, please read and send me your feedback. > A concrete information (specific apps, toolkits, specific > characters/nikud) would help us form a valid opinion] > > On Saturday, 19 ?April 2008, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le vendredi 18 avril 2008 ? 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham a ?crit : > > > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > > > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > > > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > > > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. > > > > My advice would be: > > ... > > 4. drop culmus ? DejaVu full includes Hebrew no one complained of during > > the F9 cycle, so no need to keep a separate Hebrew font on a > > space-constrained media > > If DejaVu provides "good-enough" substitute for space limited media, > than it may be OK. Well, DejaVu certainly does not aim just at "good enough". Please report any problem with it upstream. Even if Culmus stays in Fedora users will mostly see DejaVu since it's the default font set (not just in Fedora BTW). So if your script is included in DejaVu you really want to work with DejaVu upstream to get it good. Anyway that highlights a problem with fonts: users are highly sensitive to font changes, and fonts change slowly. So l10n groups *must* test the Fedora font selection very early in a cycle. Any problem spotted after what used to be called Test2 is unlikely to be fixed in time for the final release. More local involvement in font packaging would help of course. -- Nicolas Mailhot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e URL: From petersen at redhat.com Sun Apr 20 23:11:17 2008 From: petersen at redhat.com (Jens Petersen) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:11:17 +1000 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208548770.17368.9.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: <480BCD95.2060208@redhat.com> Jeremy Katz ????????: > On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 15:57 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I >> can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the >> full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. >> I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. > > Yes a lot of space in general ends up being used by fonts. I'd lean > towards saying we should make things optional in comps rather than > making explicit changes to the livecd, though from a maintenance point > of view. Although I guess if we wanted to do it first on the livecd for > F9 and then in general for F10 via comps, that'd be okay Well we have argued about this before, but my take now is that we should have Lang Support group parity across Live and standard installs: so either we don't install all the language support groups for Live or we should for standard installs, and then take comps from there. Personally I would tend towards not installing all language groups for Live and installing some Input Methods by default to compensate, which would leave Live in a similar state to what it is now, but would drop various fonts that are only installed by default for language support groups. Jens From petersen at redhat.com Sun Apr 20 23:26:48 2008 From: petersen at redhat.com (Jens Petersen) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:26:48 +1000 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1208553201.26212.16.camel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <480BD138.70005@redhat.com> Nicolas Mailhot ????????: > ?3. fonts-japanese is probably not 100% necessary when VLGothic is > available Right. It is only pulled in by @japanese-support, but should be installed for Japanese installs I think. > 4. drop culmus ? DejaVu full includes Hebrew no one complained of during > the F9 cycle, so no need to keep a separate Hebrew font on a > space-constrained media Ditto for @hebrew-support. > 5. Have the Arabic l10n group choose between kacst and paktype Hmm they are currently both default in the @fonts group. > 6. Have the Indic l10n group sort the huge number of indic fonts, > keeping only one package per script (sarai, lohit, smc, samyak) The Indic fonts are pretty small. I think mostly Lohit is preferred, except for Malayalam (smc, which is not yet in comps). Again sarai and samyak are optional in @fonts. > 7. Have the Chinese l10n group choose between cjkunifonts-uming and > cjkunifonts-ukai We already have this in @fonts, and should not make this choice for @chinese-support. > 8. add dejavu-fonts-experimental ? you *really* want the distro default > fonts to have a complete face set, a lot of users will notice and > complain otherwise Agreed. This is also already default in @fonts. > I'm afraid most wins are in 3. 5. 6. & 7., and they depend on l10n > groups telling us their wishes, which unfortunately has not happened a > lot so far. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Fonts/Triaging/L10N > remains terribly incomplete. So basically just following the current defaults in @fonts will give you nearly everything you want already. And that is my suggestion: use @fonts for this, not the language support groups which should be considered optional. Jens -- Jens Petersen I18n Engineering, Team Lead Red Hat From notting at redhat.com Tue Apr 22 21:18:18 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:18:18 -0400 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080422211818.GA15815@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Bill Nottingham (notting at redhat.com) said: > When looking over the LiveCD manifest, and where space is going, I > can't help but notice that a lot of it goes to fonts. Here's the > full list, AFAICT. The number to the left is the size of the package. > I think a good chunk of this could be pruned. ... So, while this could be a good idea, at this stage, this is probably best done for Fedora 10. I suppose one of the 'issues' here is that we want for the base livecd to include basic support for most langs, which means both fonts and input methods. However, to do that you bring in the langsupport groups, which means you do get font duplication. Bill From petersen at redhat.com Wed Apr 23 04:23:52 2008 From: petersen at redhat.com (Jens Petersen) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:23:52 +1000 Subject: pruning the fonts list In-Reply-To: <20080422211818.GA15815@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20080418195709.GA13126@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <20080422211818.GA15815@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <480EB9D8.9000304@redhat.com> Bill Nottingham ????????: > So, while this could be a good idea, at this stage, this is probably > best done for Fedora 10. Right - probably safest at this stage. > I suppose one of the 'issues' here is that we want for the base livecd > to include basic support for most langs, which means both fonts and > input methods. However, to do that you bring in the langsupport groups, > which means you do get font duplication. Agreed, and I suggested the same in another followup. Let's try to do that for F10 then. Perhaps we should have an @input-methods group in comps for that? Jens From nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net Thu Apr 24 06:59:29 2008 From: nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net (Nicolas Mailhot) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:59:29 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Garbled fonts in Fedora 9-Preview In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9271.192.54.193.58.1209020369.squirrel@rousalka.dyndns.org> Le Jeu 24 avril 2008 07:32, Peter Lemenkov a ?crit : > Hello All! > > See screenshot: > > http://peter.fedorapeople.org/bad_fonts.png I've seen this installing/updating font packages while firefox was running. Restarting firefox always fixed the problem. There is a bug somewhere in the font stack firefox uses which makes it loose its little mind when font files change under it. (if anyone had a bug pointer it'd be great) -- Nicolas Mailhot