Package: fonts-fork-awesome Version: 1.2.0+ds1-1 Control: affects -1 cacti
Hi,For src:cacti (of which I'm de-facto the only maintainer) I received a bug report in Ubuntu (#2046431) about missing files. As cacti doesn't ship these files, but Depends on fonts-fork-awesome I was wondering if cacti upstream is shipping "weird" files or if the files are reasonable to be expected and are just missing to be build/shipped in fonts-fork-awesome.
We're at least talking about ./webfonts/fa-solid-900.woff2 and ./css/all.css.
See below for my reply to the Ubuntu bug report. Paul On 14-12-2023 10:13, Francis Greaves wrote:
I setup everything, added the Gexport Plugin from here https://github.com/Cacti/plugin_gexport, but in the log I had 4 PHP errors relating to missing files: /usr/share/cacti/site/include/fa/webfonts/fa-solid-900.woff2 /usr/share/cacti/site/include/fa/css/all.css
Did this error only occur after you added the plugin?
Looking at the folder structure compared with the official download from the Cacti site:
In Debian (and hence in Ubuntu) we try to depend on packages providing functionality instead of embedding other projects in source packages. For cacti in Ubuntu, the Awesome Font is delivered by the fonts-fork-awesome package. You'll see that include/fa is a soft-link.
the include/fa/css folder only had two items fork-awesome.css and v5-compat.css when it should have 16 items the include/fa/ folder only has 5 items when it should have 10 and in particular has NO webfonts at all. Just as a test before moving to the official download I copied the include/fa/webfonts folder and the contents of the include/fa/css folder to the Ubuntu install
So, I wonder if we should request changes to the fonts-fork-awesome package. Unfortunately, I'm not experience in how webfonts work.
I have attached two files showing the folder structure of this version of Cacti and the official version to compare. The are ALOT of differences!
Yes, that's totally expected. Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature