Bug#996965: bslib and rmarkdown update
Hi Eric, Am Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 02:44:11PM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > It looks like conversion to .woff from .ttf or .otf is straightforward > with woff-tools, e.g. install fonts-roboto, then the appropriate file > can be converted by, e.g. `sfnt2woff Roboto-Regular.ttf` which creates > Roboto-Regular.woff. > > I also found that fonts-inter is in Debian. So it appears only 3 fonts > would need to be packaged. I've opened RFP bugs for them: I agree that the conversion to woff format is possible. I've managed this myself last week. The reason why I did not reported this here and rather decided to simply try uploading the fonts as they are is, that I have no idea how to find out a relation between those fonts and the cryptic (random???) font files names that are used in bslib. So even if we could convert existing font files - how should we maintain these conversions to move them to the file names that are obviously used inside the css files? > Nunito Sans https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1009730 > Neucha https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1009729 > News Cycle https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1009707 Thanks a lot for your investigation which is extremely welcome. Kind regards Andreas. > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 1:56 PM Eric Brown wrote: > > > > Minor update with source: > > > > In Debian: > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > In Debian but should ideally be packaged separately due to large size > > of texlive-fonts-extra and current policy: > > > > Montserrat, Nunito, Raleway, Source Sans Pro: texlive-fonts-extra > > > > Need Debian package (all have open licences): > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > News Cycle https://launchpad.net/newscycle > > Neucha https://typetype.org/wp-content/uploads/neucha.zip > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 7:13 AM Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > thanks a lot for your investigation. This is extremely helpful. > > > > > > Am Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 08:50:08PM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > > > > Hi again, > > > > > > > > I tried to see what happens when the woff files are deleted from bslib. > > > > > > > > I cloned the bslib git, deleted the contents of the font folder, built > > > > the R package locally, then tried to render an R markdown document > > > > that uses a bslib theme (minty). > > > > It fails with an error message (below). > > > > > > > > pandoc: > > > > /tmp/Rtmp1sYpTM/bslib-ca23be8b2c03436a7d75cedd4667b7ed/fonts/JTUSjIg1_i6t8kCHKm45xW0.woff: > > > > openBinaryFile: does not exist (No such file or directory) > > > > Error : pandoc document conversion failed with error 1 > > > > Error: callr subprocess failed: pandoc document conversion failed with > > > > error 1 > > > > Type .Last.error.trace to see where the error occurred > > > > > > Seems we need the Montserrat font from texlive-fonts-extra. But there > > > are no *.woff files. Thus I guess we need to convert the proper font > > > from there to woff format - but I have no idea at all how to do this. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Andreas. > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 11:39 AM Eric Brown wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Andreas, > > > > > > > > > > I can at least identify which .woff files correspond to which fonts, > > > > > that is possible with grep. Here's the output: > > > > > https://gist.github.com/eebrown/95615fc35af364bd0fae09a69273dbdf > > > > > > > > > > I think deleting the .woff files and seeing if the fonts render > > > > > properly when they are installed at the system level is reasonable but > > > > > I too am not sure exactly how to try out all the fonts. > > > > > > > > > > If that doesn't work, I guess it would be a matter of symlinking files > > > > > to replace the .woff files. This might require a step to derive the > > > > > .woff wiles in the format expected by bslib. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:44 AM Andreas Tille > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:42:59AM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > > > > > > > To update, I found that a few more are packaged in > > > > > > > texlive-fonts-extra ( > > > > > > > https://packages.debian.org/buster/texlive-fonts-extra) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > > > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > > > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > > > > > Lato
Bug#996965: bslib and rmarkdown update
Hi again, I tried to see what happens when the woff files are deleted from bslib. I cloned the bslib git, deleted the contents of the font folder, built the R package locally, then tried to render an R markdown document that uses a bslib theme (minty). It fails with an error message (below). pandoc: /tmp/Rtmp1sYpTM/bslib-ca23be8b2c03436a7d75cedd4667b7ed/fonts/JTUSjIg1_i6t8kCHKm45xW0.woff: openBinaryFile: does not exist (No such file or directory) Error : pandoc document conversion failed with error 1 Error: callr subprocess failed: pandoc document conversion failed with error 1 Type .Last.error.trace to see where the error occurred Best, Eric On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 11:39 AM Eric Brown wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > I can at least identify which .woff files correspond to which fonts, > that is possible with grep. Here's the output: > https://gist.github.com/eebrown/95615fc35af364bd0fae09a69273dbdf > > I think deleting the .woff files and seeing if the fonts render > properly when they are installed at the system level is reasonable but > I too am not sure exactly how to try out all the fonts. > > If that doesn't work, I guess it would be a matter of symlinking files > to replace the .woff files. This might require a step to derive the > .woff wiles in the format expected by bslib. > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:44 AM Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > Am Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:42:59AM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > > > To update, I found that a few more are packaged in texlive-fonts-extra ( > > > https://packages.debian.org/buster/texlive-fonts-extra) > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > Montserrat, Nunito, Raleway, Source Sans Pro: texlive-fonts-extra > > > > > > This leaves 4 which I could not find in Debian: > > > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > > Neucha ? > > > > Thanks a lot for this very helpful investigation. The problem now is > > how to know which of the 60 inst/fonts/*.woff files we can remove from > > the source package since these are not needed and whether the fonts > > you said are found by bslib if we simply set the dependencies you > > mentioned above (and how to test this). The names of these *.woff > > files are absolutely cryptic and I need to admit I have no idea about > > all this fonts stuff. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Andreas. > > > > > Best, > > > Eric > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 14:34 Eric Brown wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Since this is a pretty important package, I grep'd the package to see > > > > what fonts are included. It looks like some of them are already in > > > > Debian: > > > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > > > > > The rest are all SIL OFL licence (Debian compatible). I was able to find > > > > sources for all but two: > > > > > > > > Montserrat https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > > > Nunito https://github.com/googlefonts/nunito > > > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > > > Raleway https://github.com/impallari/Raleway/ > > > > Neucha ? > > > > Source Sans Pro ? > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Eric > > > > > > > -- > > > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > > > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. > > > > -- > > http://fam-tille.de > > > > -- > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. -- Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request.
Bug#996965: bslib and rmarkdown update
Hi Eric, thanks a lot for your investigation. This is extremely helpful. Am Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 08:50:08PM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > Hi again, > > I tried to see what happens when the woff files are deleted from bslib. > > I cloned the bslib git, deleted the contents of the font folder, built > the R package locally, then tried to render an R markdown document > that uses a bslib theme (minty). > It fails with an error message (below). > > pandoc: > /tmp/Rtmp1sYpTM/bslib-ca23be8b2c03436a7d75cedd4667b7ed/fonts/JTUSjIg1_i6t8kCHKm45xW0.woff: > openBinaryFile: does not exist (No such file or directory) > Error : pandoc document conversion failed with error 1 > Error: callr subprocess failed: pandoc document conversion failed with error 1 > Type .Last.error.trace to see where the error occurred Seems we need the Montserrat font from texlive-fonts-extra. But there are no *.woff files. Thus I guess we need to convert the proper font from there to woff format - but I have no idea at all how to do this. Kind regards Andreas. > > Best, > Eric > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 11:39 AM Eric Brown wrote: > > > > Hi Andreas, > > > > I can at least identify which .woff files correspond to which fonts, > > that is possible with grep. Here's the output: > > https://gist.github.com/eebrown/95615fc35af364bd0fae09a69273dbdf > > > > I think deleting the .woff files and seeing if the fonts render > > properly when they are installed at the system level is reasonable but > > I too am not sure exactly how to try out all the fonts. > > > > If that doesn't work, I guess it would be a matter of symlinking files > > to replace the .woff files. This might require a step to derive the > > .woff wiles in the format expected by bslib. > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:44 AM Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > Am Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:42:59AM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > > > > To update, I found that a few more are packaged in texlive-fonts-extra ( > > > > https://packages.debian.org/buster/texlive-fonts-extra) > > > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > Montserrat, Nunito, Raleway, Source Sans Pro: texlive-fonts-extra > > > > > > > > This leaves 4 which I could not find in Debian: > > > > > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > > > Neucha ? > > > > > > Thanks a lot for this very helpful investigation. The problem now is > > > how to know which of the 60 inst/fonts/*.woff files we can remove from > > > the source package since these are not needed and whether the fonts > > > you said are found by bslib if we simply set the dependencies you > > > mentioned above (and how to test this). The names of these *.woff > > > files are absolutely cryptic and I need to admit I have no idea about > > > all this fonts stuff. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Andreas. > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 14:34 Eric Brown wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Since this is a pretty important package, I grep'd the package to see > > > > > what fonts are included. It looks like some of them are already in > > > > > Debian: > > > > > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > > > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > > > > > > > The rest are all SIL OFL licence (Debian compatible). I was able to > > > > > find > > > > > sources for all but two: > > > > > > > > > > Montserrat https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat > > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > > > > Nunito https://github.com/googlefonts/nunito > > > > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > > > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > > > > Raleway https://github.com/impallari/Raleway/ > > > > > Neucha ? > > > > > Source Sans Pro ? > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > > > > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. > > > > > > -- > > > http://fam-tille.de > > > > > > > > -- > > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. > > > > -- > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on
Bug#996965: bslib and rmarkdown update
Hi Eric, Am Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:42:59AM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > To update, I found that a few more are packaged in texlive-fonts-extra ( > https://packages.debian.org/buster/texlive-fonts-extra) > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > Montserrat, Nunito, Raleway, Source Sans Pro: texlive-fonts-extra > > This leaves 4 which I could not find in Debian: > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > Neucha ? Thanks a lot for this very helpful investigation. The problem now is how to know which of the 60 inst/fonts/*.woff files we can remove from the source package since these are not needed and whether the fonts you said are found by bslib if we simply set the dependencies you mentioned above (and how to test this). The names of these *.woff files are absolutely cryptic and I need to admit I have no idea about all this fonts stuff. Kind regards Andreas. > Best, > Eric > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 14:34 Eric Brown wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Since this is a pretty important package, I grep'd the package to see > > what fonts are included. It looks like some of them are already in > > Debian: > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > The rest are all SIL OFL licence (Debian compatible). I was able to find > > sources for all but two: > > > > Montserrat https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > Nunito https://github.com/googlefonts/nunito > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > Raleway https://github.com/impallari/Raleway/ > > Neucha ? > > Source Sans Pro ? > > > > Best, > > Eric > > > -- > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#996965: bslib and rmarkdown update
Hi Andreas, I can at least identify which .woff files correspond to which fonts, that is possible with grep. Here's the output: https://gist.github.com/eebrown/95615fc35af364bd0fae09a69273dbdf I think deleting the .woff files and seeing if the fonts render properly when they are installed at the system level is reasonable but I too am not sure exactly how to try out all the fonts. If that doesn't work, I guess it would be a matter of symlinking files to replace the .woff files. This might require a step to derive the .woff wiles in the format expected by bslib. On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:44 AM Andreas Tille wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > Am Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 06:42:59AM -0400 schrieb Eric Brown: > > To update, I found that a few more are packaged in texlive-fonts-extra ( > > https://packages.debian.org/buster/texlive-fonts-extra) > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > Montserrat, Nunito, Raleway, Source Sans Pro: texlive-fonts-extra > > > > This leaves 4 which I could not find in Debian: > > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > Neucha ? > > Thanks a lot for this very helpful investigation. The problem now is > how to know which of the 60 inst/fonts/*.woff files we can remove from > the source package since these are not needed and whether the fonts > you said are found by bslib if we simply set the dependencies you > mentioned above (and how to test this). The names of these *.woff > files are absolutely cryptic and I need to admit I have no idea about > all this fonts stuff. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > > Best, > > Eric > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 14:34 Eric Brown wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Since this is a pretty important package, I grep'd the package to see > > > what fonts are included. It looks like some of them are already in > > > Debian: > > > > > > Roboto https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-roboto > > > Ubuntu https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/fonts-ubuntu > > > Open Sans https://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-open-sans > > > Latohttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-lato > > > Cabin Sketchhttps://packages.debian.org/sid/fonts-cabinsketch > > > > > > The rest are all SIL OFL licence (Debian compatible). I was able to find > > > sources for all but two: > > > > > > Montserrat https://github.com/JulietaUla/Montserrat > > > Nunito Sans https://github.com/googlefonts/NunitoSans > > > Nunito https://github.com/googlefonts/nunito > > > Inter https://github.com/rsms/inter/ > > > News Cycle https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~n8/newscycle/ > > > Raleway https://github.com/impallari/Raleway/ > > > Neucha ? > > > Source Sans Pro ? > > > > > > Best, > > > Eric > > > > > -- > > Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC > > For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request. > > -- > http://fam-tille.de -- Eric Brown MD MSc FRCPC For encryption, OpenPGP public key available on request.
