Problems detected in the adf-accanthis-fonts rawhide package!
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 adf-accanthis-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 19
adf-accanthis-fonts adf-accanthis-2-fonts 4 4
adf-accanthis-fonts adf-accanthis-3-fonts 4 4
adf-accanthis-fonts adf-accanthis-fonts4 4
Total 12 12
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the adf-accanthis-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
adf-accanthis-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the abyssinica-fonts rawhide package!
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 abyssinica-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18
abyssinica-fonts abyssinica-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the abyssinica-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
abyssinica-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the asana-math-fonts rawhide package!
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 asana-math-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
asana-math-fonts asana-math-fonts 1 1 1
Total 1 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the asana-math-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
asana-math-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the apanov-heuristica-fonts rawhide package!
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 apanov-heuristica-fonts
package:
SRPM RPM 17 19
apanov-heuristica-fonts apanov-heuristica-fonts 4 4
Total4 4
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the apanov-heuristica-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
apanov-heuristica-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the apanov-edrip-fonts rawhide package!
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 apanov-edrip-fonts package:
SRPMRPM 17
apanov-edrip-fonts apanov-edrip-fonts 4
Total 4
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 apanov-edrip-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
apanov-edrip-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the artwiz-aleczapka-fonts rawhide package!
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 artwiz-aleczapka-fonts package:
SRPMRPM 4 7 11 17 19
artwiz-aleczapka-fonts artwiz-aleczapka-fonts 48 3 48 48 48
Total 48 3 48 48 48
4. Fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata
☛ Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to
work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at
package creation time.
7. Fonts that declare non-WWS compliant styles
☛ This WWS-like test checks if font styles use the “Width Weight Slant”
naming
convention¹. As noted by Adobe the CSS family model is less than ideal, but
it's a standard and applications expect it².
Since our applications do not workaround bad font naming with dynamic
renaming heuristics, achieving consistent style naming that can be used in
CSS/web oriented applications requires fixing face naming directly in the
font files. For this reason we test font style naming separately from font
family naming, and do not support complex weight abbreviations and
suffixes³.
To pass this test make sure your style names do not include any qualifier
not defined in the WWS whitepaper¹, and that “Width”, “Weight” or “Slant”
are defined only once. Any other qualifier belongs in the font family name.
If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
naming so it does not need further reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch
it (if it is available in sfd form) or add a fontconfig rule to your
package to hide the problem⁴.
¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20%20OT%2015.pdf
³ As defined in the end of the WWS renaming algorithm described in the
Microsoft whitepaper.
⁴ cf the “fontpackages” remapping template; unfortunately this workaround
won't fix problems for non-fontconfig applications, or when
interoperating with other systems.
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the artwiz-aleczapka-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
artwiz-aleczapka-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the bpg-fonts rawhide package!
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
bpg-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the bitmap-fonts rawhide package!
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 bitmap-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 7 9 11 17 19
bitmap-fonts bitmap-cjk-fonts ‧ ‧ ‧ 2 2
bitmap-fonts bitmap-fonts 14 15 32 32 32
Total 14 15 32 34 34
7. Fonts that declare non-WWS compliant styles
☛ This WWS-like test checks if font styles use the “Width Weight Slant”
naming
convention¹. As noted by Adobe the CSS family model is less than ideal, but
it's a standard and applications expect it².
Since our applications do not workaround bad font naming with dynamic
renaming heuristics, achieving consistent style naming that can be used in
CSS/web oriented applications requires fixing face naming directly in the
font files. For this reason we test font style naming separately from font
family naming, and do not support complex weight abbreviations and
suffixes³.
To pass this test make sure your style names do not include any qualifier
not defined in the WWS whitepaper¹, and that “Width”, “Weight” or “Slant”
are defined only once. Any other qualifier belongs in the font family name.
If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
naming so it does not need further reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch
it (if it is available in sfd form) or add a fontconfig rule to your
package to hide the problem⁴.
¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20%20OT%2015.pdf
³ As defined in the end of the WWS renaming algorithm described in the
Microsoft whitepaper.
⁴ cf the “fontpackages” remapping template; unfortunately this workaround
won't fix problems for non-fontconfig applications, or when
interoperating with other systems.
9. Font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Face duplication wastes resources infrastructure and user side.
Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up
to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy
data. Even when some duplicated font faces are a genuine fork with
different features from the original, applications won't be able to select
them reliably because of naming collision.
We should always ship only one version of a font face in the repository,
and use fontconfig or symlinks to share it accross packages.
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the bitmap-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
bitmap-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the beteckna-fonts rawhide package!
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 beteckna-fonts package:
SRPMRPM17 19
beteckna-fonts beteckna-fonts 1 1
beteckna-fonts beteckna-lower-case-fonts 4 4
beteckna-fonts beteckna-small-caps-fonts 1 1
Total 6 6
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the beteckna-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
beteckna-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the chisholm-to-be-continued-fonts rawhide package!
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 chisholm-to-be-continued-fonts
package:
SRPMRPM 17
chisholm-to-be-continued-fonts chisholm-to-be-continued-fonts 1
Total 1
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 chisholm-to-be-continued-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
chisholm-to-be-continued-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the baekmuk-ttf-fonts rawhide package!
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 baekmuk-ttf-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
baekmuk-ttf-fonts baekmuk-ttf-batang-fonts 1 1 1
baekmuk-ttf-fonts baekmuk-ttf-dotum-fonts 1 1 1
baekmuk-ttf-fonts baekmuk-ttf-gulim-fonts 1 1 1
baekmuk-ttf-fonts baekmuk-ttf-hline-fonts 1 1 1
Total 4 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the baekmuk-ttf-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
baekmuk-ttf-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the cf-bonveno-fonts rawhide package!
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 cf-bonveno-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17
cf-bonveno-fonts cf-bonveno-fonts 1
Total 1
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 cf-bonveno-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
cf-bonveno-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the bitstream-vera-fonts rawhide package!
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 bitstream-vera-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 8 9 17 19
bitstream-vera-fonts bitstream-vera-sans-fonts 4 4 4 4
bitstream-vera-fonts bitstream-vera-sans-mono-fonts 4 4 4 4
bitstream-vera-fonts bitstream-vera-serif-fonts 2 2 2 2
Total 10 10 10 10
8. Exact font duplication
☛ Several packages duplicate font files with the same checksum. This
needlessly wastes resources.
9. Font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Face duplication wastes resources infrastructure and user side.
Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up
to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy
data. Even when some duplicated font faces are a genuine fork with
different features from the original, applications won't be able to select
them reliably because of naming collision.
We should always ship only one version of a font face in the repository,
and use fontconfig or symlinks to share it accross packages.
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the bitstream-vera-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
bitstream-vera-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the brettfont-fonts rawhide package!
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 brettfont-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17
brettfont-fonts brettfont-fonts 1
Total1
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 brettfont-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
brettfont-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the conakry-fonts rawhide package!
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 conakry-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 18
conakry-fonts conakry-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the conakry-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
conakry-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts rawhide package!
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 dejavu-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 9 17 18 19
dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-sans-fonts ‧ 1 9 9
dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-sans-mono-fonts ‧ 4 ‧ ‧
dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts ‧ 8 ‧ 8
dejavu-fonts dejavu-sans-fonts 3 5 9 9
dejavu-fonts dejavu-sans-mono-fonts ‧ 4 2 2
dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts ‧ 8 ‧ 8
Total 3 30 20 36
9. Font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Face duplication wastes resources infrastructure and user side.
Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up
to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy
data. Even when some duplicated font faces are a genuine fork with
different features from the original, applications won't be able to select
them reliably because of naming collision.
We should always ship only one version of a font face in the repository,
and use fontconfig or symlinks to share it accross packages.
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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
dejavu-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the cjkuni-fonts rawhide package!
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 cjkuni-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 3 12 14 17 19
cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-fonts-compat ‧ 2 ‧ ‧ ‧
cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-ukai-fonts1 ‧ ‧ 1 1
cjkuni-fonts cjkuni-uming-fonts 1 ‧ 1 1 1
Total2 2 1 2 2
3. Fonts in packages that contain non-font data
☛ Please do not mix font files with non-font data in packages. Fonts are
usually useful outside of the package that deploys them and should be
installable without pulling in other material.
12. Font linking
☛ Symlinking is a way for non-font packages to avoid duplicating font files,
but it is also a symptom of missing or incomplete fontconfig support.
Fontconfig has been our default font system for a long time, and accessing
fonts by other means will cause behaviour inconsistencies and many other
problems (since fontconfig is much more than a file locating library)
Please ask the package upstream to add fontconfig support to their code
(possibly, via a higher-level library such as pango-cairo).
14. Fonts rpmlint errors on
☛ Check rpmlint output to fix those packages (using the -i flag if you
don't understand it).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the cjkuni-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
cjkuni-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts rawhide package!
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 chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts
package:
SRPMRPM 7 17
chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts 3 3
Total 3 3
7. Fonts that declare non-WWS compliant styles
☛ This WWS-like test checks if font styles use the “Width Weight Slant”
naming
convention¹. As noted by Adobe the CSS family model is less than ideal, but
it's a standard and applications expect it².
Since our applications do not workaround bad font naming with dynamic
renaming heuristics, achieving consistent style naming that can be used in
CSS/web oriented applications requires fixing face naming directly in the
font files. For this reason we test font style naming separately from font
family naming, and do not support complex weight abbreviations and
suffixes³.
To pass this test make sure your style names do not include any qualifier
not defined in the WWS whitepaper¹, and that “Width”, “Weight” or “Slant”
are defined only once. Any other qualifier belongs in the font family name.
If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
naming so it does not need further reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch
it (if it is available in sfd form) or add a fontconfig rule to your
package to hide the problem⁴.
¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20%20OT%2015.pdf
³ As defined in the end of the WWS renaming algorithm described in the
Microsoft whitepaper.
⁴ 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 chisholm-letterslaughing-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
chisholm-letterslaughing-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-ambrosia-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-ambrosia-fonts package: SRPMRPM 19 gfs-ambrosia-fonts gfs-ambrosia-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-ambrosia-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 gfs-ambrosia-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dustin-dustismo-fonts rawhide package!
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 dustin-dustismo-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
dustin-dustismo-fonts dustin-dustismo-roman-fonts 4 ‧ ‧
dustin-dustismo-fonts dustin-dustismo-sans-fonts 4 4 4
Total8 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dustin-dustismo-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
dustin-dustismo-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the drehatlas-widelands-fonts rawhide package!
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 drehatlas-widelands-fonts
package:
SRPM RPM14 17 19
drehatlas-widelands-fonts drehatlas-widelands-fonts 1 1 1
Total 1 1 1
14. Fonts rpmlint errors on
☛ Check rpmlint output to fix those packages (using the -i flag if you
don't understand it).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the drehatlas-widelands-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
drehatlas-widelands-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-eustace-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-eustace-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 19
gfs-eustace-fonts gfs-eustace-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-eustace-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
gfs-eustace-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-ignacio-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-ignacio-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 19
gfs-ignacio-fonts gfs-ignacio-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-ignacio-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
gfs-ignacio-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-baskerville-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-baskerville-fonts package: SRPM RPM19 gfs-baskerville-fonts gfs-baskerville-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-baskerville-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 gfs-baskerville-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-fleischman-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-fleischman-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 19
gfs-fleischman-fonts gfs-fleischman-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-fleischman-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
gfs-fleischman-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dustin-domestic-manners-fonts rawhide package!
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 dustin-domestic-manners-fonts
package:
SRPM RPM17
dustin-domestic-manners-fonts dustin-domestic-manners-fonts 1
Total 1
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 dustin-domestic-manners-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
dustin-domestic-manners-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the fonts-KOI8-R rawhide package!
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 fonts-KOI8-R package: SRPM RPM 4516 19 fonts-KOI8-R fonts-KOI8-R 16 16 16 16 fonts-KOI8-R fonts-KOI8-R-100dpi 60 60 60 60 fonts-KOI8-R fonts-KOI8-R-75dpi 114 114 114 114 Total190 190 190 190 4. Fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ☛ Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at package creation time. 5. Fonts in packages that do not respect font naming conventions ☛ Please respect font package naming conventions and provide consistent packages to users. Some scripts may depend on strict package naming. 16. Fonts fc-query can not parse ☛ fc-query could not parse some font files in the package. The files may be malformed and in need of fixing, or fc-query has a bug (in that case, please report the problem so it is fixed). Any font file rejected by fc-query will be useless in fontconfig and most applications. If it can not be fixed drop it. 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the fonts-KOI8-R 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 fonts-KOI8-R.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the efont-unicode-bdf rawhide package!
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 efont-unicode-bdf package:
SRPM RPM5 9 11 17 19
efont-unicode-bdf efont-unicode-bdf 60 45 60 60 60
Total 60 45 60 60 60
5. Fonts in packages that do not respect font naming conventions
☛ Please respect font package naming conventions and provide consistent
packages to users. Some scripts may depend on strict package naming.
9. Font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Face duplication wastes resources infrastructure and user side.
Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up
to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy
data. Even when some duplicated font faces are a genuine fork with
different features from the original, applications won't be able to select
them reliably because of naming collision.
We should always ship only one version of a font face in the repository,
and use fontconfig or symlinks to share it accross packages.
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the efont-unicode-bdf 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
efont-unicode-bdf.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the fonts-hebrew-fancy rawhide package!
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 fonts-hebrew-fancy package: SRPMRPM 4 5 11 19 fonts-hebrew-fancy fonts-hebrew-fancy 9 9 9 1 Total 9 9 9 1 4. Fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata ☛ Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at package creation time. 5. Fonts in packages that do not respect font naming conventions ☛ Please respect font package naming conventions and provide consistent packages to users. Some scripts may depend on strict package naming. 11. Packages that mix different font families ☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family per font package. (If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of). 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the fonts-hebrew-fancy 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 fonts-hebrew-fancy.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the apa-new-athena-unicode-fonts rawhide package!
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 apa-new-athena-unicode-fonts
package:
SRPM RPM 17 18
apa-new-athena-unicode-fonts apa-new-athena-unicode-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the apa-new-athena-unicode-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
apa-new-athena-unicode-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts rawhide package!
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
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 19
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts 1 1
Total1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-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
drehatlas-warender-bibliothek-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-complutum-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-complutum-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-complutum-fonts gfs-complutum-fonts 1 Total1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-complutum-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 gfs-complutum-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-didot-classic-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-didot-classic-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-didot-classic-fonts gfs-didot-classic-fonts 1 Total1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-didot-classic-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 gfs-didot-classic-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the ctan-musixtex-fonts rawhide package!
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 ctan-musixtex-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 11 17 19
ctan-musixtex-fonts ctan-musixtex-fonts 71 60 70
Total71 60 70
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the ctan-musixtex-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
ctan-musixtex-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gargi-fonts rawhide package!
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 gargi-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 19
gargi-fonts gargi-fonts 1 1
Total1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gargi-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
gargi-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-gazis-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-gazis-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-gazis-fonts gfs-gazis-fonts 1 Total1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-gazis-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 gfs-gazis-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-jackson-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-jackson-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 19
gfs-jackson-fonts gfs-jackson-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-jackson-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
gfs-jackson-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the adf-tribun-fonts rawhide package!
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 adf-tribun-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 6 11 17 19
adf-tribun-fonts adf-tribun-fonts 4 12 12 12
Total 4 12 12 12
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.
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the adf-tribun-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
adf-tribun-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-theokritos-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 20
gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
20. Fonts with localized metadata but no English variant
☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not
include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata
in English.
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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
gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-artemisia-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-artemisia-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
gfs-artemisia-fonts gfs-artemisia-fonts 4 4 4
Total4 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-artemisia-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
gfs-artemisia-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-didot-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-didot-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
gfs-didot-fonts gfs-didot-fonts 4 4 4
Total4 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-didot-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
gfs-didot-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-bodoni-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-bodoni-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
gfs-bodoni-fonts gfs-bodoni-fonts 4 4 4
Total 4 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-bodoni-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
gfs-bodoni-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-porson-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-porson-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-porson-fonts gfs-porson-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-porson-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 gfs-porson-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-neohellenic-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-neohellenic-fonts package:
SRPM RPM17 18 19
gfs-neohellenic-fonts gfs-neohellenic-fonts 4 4 4
Total 4 4 4
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-neohellenic-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
gfs-neohellenic-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-olga-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-olga-fonts package: SRPMRPM 19 gfs-olga-fonts gfs-olga-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-olga-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 gfs-olga-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-decker-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-decker-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-decker-fonts gfs-decker-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-decker-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 gfs-decker-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-pyrsos-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-pyrsos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 19 gfs-pyrsos-fonts gfs-pyrsos-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-pyrsos-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 gfs-pyrsos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-solomos-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-solomos-fonts package: SRPM RPM19 gfs-solomos-fonts gfs-solomos-fonts 1 Total 1 19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks ☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time. You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users ¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-solomos-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 gfs-solomos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz-compressed-tar ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-nicefore-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-nicefore-fonts package:
SRPMRPM 17 19
gfs-nicefore-fonts gfs-nicefore-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-nicefore-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
gfs-nicefore-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts rawhide package!
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 hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts
package:
SRPMRPM 7 17 19
hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts 1 4 4
hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts hartke-aurulent-sans-mono-fonts ‧ 1 1
Total1 5 5
7. Fonts that declare non-WWS compliant styles
☛ This WWS-like test checks if font styles use the “Width Weight Slant”
naming
convention¹. As noted by Adobe the CSS family model is less than ideal, but
it's a standard and applications expect it².
Since our applications do not workaround bad font naming with dynamic
renaming heuristics, achieving consistent style naming that can be used in
CSS/web oriented applications requires fixing face naming directly in the
font files. For this reason we test font style naming separately from font
family naming, and do not support complex weight abbreviations and
suffixes³.
To pass this test make sure your style names do not include any qualifier
not defined in the WWS whitepaper¹, and that “Width”, “Weight” or “Slant”
are defined only once. Any other qualifier belongs in the font family name.
If one your font files is listed here please ask its upstream to fix its
naming so it does not need further reprocessing. And in the meanwhile patch
it (if it is available in sfd form) or add a fontconfig rule to your
package to hide the problem⁴.
¹ http://blogs.msdn.com/text/attachment/2249036.ashx
http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/typotechnica2007/Font%20names.pdf
² http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/atypi2006/CSS%20%20OT%2015.pdf
³ As defined in the end of the WWS renaming algorithm described in the
Microsoft whitepaper.
⁴ 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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the hartke-aurulent-sans-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
hartke-aurulent-sans-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-philostratos-fonts rawhide package!
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 gfs-philostratos-fonts package:
SRPMRPM 17 19
gfs-philostratos-fonts gfs-philostratos-fonts 1 1
Total 1 1
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-philostratos-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
gfs-philostratos-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the ipa-mincho-fonts rawhide package!
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 ipa-mincho-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
ipa-mincho-fonts ipa-mincho-fonts 1 1 1
Total 1 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the ipa-mincho-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
ipa-mincho-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the ipa-gothic-fonts rawhide package!
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 ipa-gothic-fonts package:
SRPM RPM 17 18 19
ipa-gothic-fonts ipa-gothic-fonts 1 1 1
Total 1 1 1
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
18. Fonts with partial unicode block coverage
☛ Some font files included in the package are missing only a few glyphs to
fully cover an Unicode block. Therefore they could be made useful to more
people with only a little effort.
The Unicode consortium revises its tables regularly, and therefore a font
may need to be extended to maintain its full coverage when a new Unicode
revision is published¹.
To check a font file unicode coverage, run the ttfcoverage command. It only
works for modern SFNT fonts (.otf, .ttf).
¹ http://www.unicode.org/charts/
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the ipa-gothic-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
ipa-gothic-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the ghostscript-fonts rawhide package!
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 ghostscript-fonts package:
SRPM RPM4 6 8 9 11 17 19
ghostscript-fonts ghostscript-fonts 17 2 4 8 17 17 17
Total 17 2 4 8 17 17 17
4. Fonts in packages that do not declare font metadata
☛ Font-specific rpm metadata is required for automatic font installation to
work. If you apply our font packaging templates, it will be generated at
package creation time.
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.
8. Exact font duplication
☛ Several packages duplicate font files with the same checksum. This
needlessly wastes resources.
9. Font faces duplicated by different packages
☛ Face duplication wastes resources infrastructure and user side.
Very often an upstream that copied some fonts will forget to keep them up
to date, and the duplication will result in the distribution of old buggy
data. Even when some duplicated font faces are a genuine fork with
different features from the original, applications won't be able to select
them reliably because of naming collision.
We should always ship only one version of a font face in the repository,
and use fontconfig or symlinks to share it accross packages.
11. Packages that mix different font families
☛ Reliable font auto-installation requires shipping only one font family
per font package.
(If you've remapped some font names at the fontconfig level your package
may appear here pending some fontconfig fixes upstream is aware of).
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
19. Fonts that do not pass fontlint sanity checks
☛ Fontforge's fontlint¹ test suite found problems in some files included in
the package. Those problems may not be obvious and only manifest as strange
behaviour in specific applications (making them hard to debug). For that
reason it is recommanded to report those problems upstream and get them
fixed, even if the font file seems to work fine most of the time.
You can ask help about specific fontlint errors on:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fontforge-users
¹ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/fontlint.html
Please take the appropriate measures to fix the ghostscript-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
ghostscript-fonts.tar.xz
Description: application/xz-compressed-tar
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your gfs-theokritos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 17 gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 Total 1 17. Packages with localized metadata but no English variant ☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata in English. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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) gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your dejavu-fonts package: SRPM RPM 10 dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts 2 dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts 2 Total 4 10. Font faces duplicated within a package ☛ Face duplication within a package is almost certainly a bug, except for special symbol font families. Fonts that were split because of the limitations of legacy font formats (PCF, Type 1…) should be converted to modern OpenType (TT, CFF or bitmap) containers. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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) dejavu-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your gfs-theokritos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 17 gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 Total 1 17. Packages with localized metadata but no English variant ☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata in English. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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) gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your dejavu-fonts package: SRPM RPM 10 dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts 2 dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts 2 Total 4 10. Font faces duplicated within a package ☛ Face duplication within a package is almost certainly a bug, except for special symbol font families. Fonts that were split because of the limitations of legacy font formats (PCF, Type 1…) should be converted to modern OpenType (TT, CFF or bitmap) containers. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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) dejavu-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your dejavu-fonts package: SRPM RPM 10 dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts 2 dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts 2 Total 4 10. Font faces duplicated within a package ☛ Face duplication within a package is almost certainly a bug, except for special symbol font families. Fonts that were split because of the limitations of legacy font formats (PCF, Type 1…) should be converted to modern OpenType (TT, CFF or bitmap) containers. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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) dejavu-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your gfs-theokritos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 17 gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 Total 1 17. Packages with localized metadata but no English variant ☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata in English. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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) gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your gfs-theokritos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 17 gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 Total 1 17. Packages with localized metadata but no English variant ☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata in English. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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) gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your dejavu-fonts package: SRPM RPM 10 dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts 2 dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts 2 Total 4 10. Font faces duplicated within a package ☛ Face duplication within a package is almost certainly a bug, except for special symbol font families. Fonts that were split because of the limitations of legacy font formats (PCF, Type 1…) should be converted to modern OpenType (TT, CFF or bitmap) containers. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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) dejavu-fonts.tar.xz Description: application/xz ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the gfs-theokritos-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your gfs-theokritos-fonts package: SRPM RPM 17 gfs-theokritos-fonts gfs-theokritos-fonts 1 Total 1 17. Packages with localized metadata but no English variant ☛ Some font files in the package declare localized metadata, but do not include an English variant. They need to be fixed to also declare metadata in English. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the gfs-theokritos-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) gfs-theokritos-fonts.tar.xz Description: Binary data ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
Problems detected in the dejavu-fonts package!
Dear packager, At 20091018T220923Z, while scanning the test repository located at: file:///tmp/test … I have identified the following problems in your dejavu-fonts package: SRPM RPM 10 dejavu-fonts dejavu-lgc-serif-fonts 2 dejavu-fonts dejavu-serif-fonts 2 Total 4 10. Font faces duplicated within a package ☛ Face duplication within a package is almost certainly a bug, except for special symbol font families. Fonts that were split because of the limitations of legacy font formats (PCF, Type 1…) should be converted to modern OpenType (TT, CFF or bitmap) containers. Please take the appropriate measures to fix the dejavu-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) dejavu-fonts.tar.xz Description: Binary data ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/fontpackages/devel .cvsignore, 1.10, 1.11 fontpackages.spec, 1.15, 1.16 import.log, 1.12, 1.13 sources, 1.10, 1.11
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv30641/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore fontpackages.spec import.log sources
Log Message:
1.21 - lightly tested ambitious macro rewrite, here be dragons
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.10
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -p -r1.10 -r1.11
--- .cvsignore 19 Feb 2009 05:55:46 - 1.10
+++ .cvsignore 2 Jun 2009 22:11:42 - 1.11
@@ -1 +1 @@
-fontpackages-1.20.tar.bz2
+fontpackages-1.21.tar.bz2
Index: fontpackages.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/fontpackages.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -r1.15 -r1.16
--- fontpackages.spec 24 Feb 2009 17:50:40 - 1.15
+++ fontpackages.spec 2 Jun 2009 22:11:42 - 1.16
@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
%global rpmmacrodir %{_sysconfdir}/rpm/
Name:fontpackages
-Version: 1.20
-Release: 2%{?dist}
+Version: 1.21
+Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages
Group: Development/System
@@ -86,8 +86,6 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%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
@@ -99,8 +97,14 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%changelog
-* Tue Feb 24 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 1.20-2
-- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
+* Tue Jun 2 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nim at fedoraproject dot org
+- 1.21-1
+â try to handle more corner naming cases in lua macro â expect some fallout
+ if your spec uses weird naming
+
+* Tue Feb 24 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
+- 1.20-2
+â Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
* Wed Feb 18 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nim at fedoraproject dot org
- 1.20-1
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.12
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -p -r1.12 -r1.13
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:32:21 - 1.12
+++ import.log 2 Jun 2009 22:11:42 - 1.13
@@ -10,3 +10,4 @@ fontpackages-1_19-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackag
fontpackages-1_19-2_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.19-2.fc11.src.rpm:1234813732
fontpackages-1_20-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.20-1.fc11.src.rpm:1234998636
fontpackages-1_20-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.20-1.fc11.src.rpm:1235377920
+fontpackages-1_21-1_fc12:HEAD:fontpackages-1.21-1.fc12.src.rpm:1243980659
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.10
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -p -r1.10 -r1.11
--- sources 19 Feb 2009 05:55:46 - 1.10
+++ sources 2 Jun 2009 22:11:43 - 1.11
@@ -1 +1 @@
-b836f00bcf709f42295f624bbf4f19c7 fontpackages-1.20.tar.bz2
+f4a23a889cdf30b9bdb2eba74c86e6bc fontpackages-1.21.tar.bz2
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel import.log, 1.3, 1.4 sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf, 1.1, 1.2 sil-charis-fonts.spec, 1.5, 1.6
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv32276/devel
Modified Files:
import.log sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf
sil-charis-fonts.spec
Log Message:
prepare for charis sil compact import
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.3 -r1.4
--- import.log 21 May 2009 18:11:59 - 1.3
+++ import.log 27 May 2009 19:06:00 - 1.4
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-6_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-6.fc11.src.rpm:1233040224
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-7_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-7.fc11.src.rpm:1235379642
sil-charis-fonts-4_106-1_fc12:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.106-1.fc12.src.rpm:1242929489
+sil-charis-fonts-4_106-2_fc12:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.106-2.fc12.src.rpm:1243451099
Index: sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.1
+++ sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf27 May 2009 19:06:00 - 1.2
@@ -20,6 +20,12 @@
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
+familyCharis SIL Compact/family
+accept
+ familyCharis SIL/family
+/accept
+ /alias
+ alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL Literacy/family
accept
familyCharis SIL/family
Index: sil-charis-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/sil-charis-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.5
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -p -r1.5 -r1.6
--- sil-charis-fonts.spec 21 May 2009 18:11:59 - 1.5
+++ sil-charis-fonts.spec 27 May 2009 19:06:00 - 1.6
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 4.106
-Release: 1%{?dist}
+Release: 2%{?dist}
Summary: A serif smart font similar to Bitstream Charter
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -70,11 +70,16 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%changelog
+* Wed May 27 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 4.106-2
+â Propose Charis SIL as substitute to Charis SIL Compact when it's not
available
+
* Fri May 21 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 4.106-1
â This version supports Unicode 5.1 and adds support for Small capitals
-* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 4.104-8
+* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
+- 4.104-8
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Feb 16 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11 .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 import.log, 1.2, 1.3 sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf, 1.1, 1.2 sil-charis-fonts.spec, 1.4, 1.5 sources, 1.2, 1.3
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1143/F-11
Modified Files:
.cvsignore import.log sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf
sil-charis-fonts.spec sources
Log Message:
prepare for charis sil compact import
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- .cvsignore 27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.2
+++ .cvsignore 27 May 2009 19:10:20 - 1.3
@@ -1 +1 @@
-CharisSIL4.104.zip
+CharisSIL4.106.zip
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 09:01:05 - 1.2
+++ import.log 27 May 2009 19:10:20 - 1.3
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-6_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-6.fc11.src.rpm:1233040224
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-7_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-7.fc11.src.rpm:1235379642
+sil-charis-fonts-4_106-2_fc12:F-11:sil-charis-fonts-4.106-2.fc12.src.rpm:1243451246
Index: sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11/sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.1
+++ sil-charis-fonts-fontconfig.conf27 May 2009 19:10:20 - 1.2
@@ -20,6 +20,12 @@
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
+familyCharis SIL Compact/family
+accept
+ familyCharis SIL/family
+/accept
+ /alias
+ alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL Literacy/family
accept
familyCharis SIL/family
Index: sil-charis-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11/sil-charis-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -p -r1.4 -r1.5
--- sil-charis-fonts.spec 26 Feb 2009 00:59:58 - 1.4
+++ sil-charis-fonts.spec 27 May 2009 19:10:20 - 1.5
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
%global archivename CharisSIL
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
-Version: 4.104
-Release: 8%{?dist}
+Version: 4.106
+Release: 2%{?dist}
Summary: A serif smart font similar to Bitstream Charter
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -66,11 +66,20 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf
-%doc *.txt *.pdf
+%doc *.txt
%changelog
-* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 4.104-8
+* Wed May 27 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 4.106-2
+â Propose Charis SIL as substitute to Charis SIL Compact when it's not
available
+
+* Fri May 21 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 4.106-1
+â This version supports Unicode 5.1 and adds support for Small capitals
+
+* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
+- 4.104-8
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Feb 16 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/F-11/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- sources 27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.2
+++ sources 27 May 2009 19:10:20 - 1.3
@@ -1 +1 @@
-acc153c243b90e3e5d0bb53476ab894e CharisSIL4.104.zip
+045aea5116c6c20e5b84e165d9727f0c CharisSIL4.106.zip
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/F-11 import.log, NONE, 1.1 sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/F-11
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1854/F-11
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
import.log sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf
sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec
Log Message:
initial import
--- NEW FILE import.log ---
sil-charis-compact-fonts-4_106-1_fc12:F-11:sil-charis-compact-fonts-4.106-1.fc12.src.rpm:1243451470
--- NEW FILE sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf ---
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM ../fonts.dtd
fontconfig
alias
familyserif/family
prefer
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/prefer
/alias
alias
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
default
familyserif/family
/default
/alias
alias binding=same
familyBitstream Charter/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL Literacy/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
/fontconfig
--- NEW FILE sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec ---
%global fontname sil-charis-compact
%global fontconf 61-%{fontname}.conf
%global archivename CharisSILCompact
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 4.106
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: A version of Charis SIL with tighter line spacing
Group: User Interface/X
License: OFL
URL: http://scripts.sil.org/CharisSILFont
# Actual download URL
#
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/render_download.php?site_id=nrsiformat=filemedia_id=%{archivename}.zipfilename=%{archivename}%{version}.zip
Source0: %{archivename}%{version}.zip
Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf
BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel
Requires: fontpackages-filesystem
%description
Charis SIL provides glyphs for a wide range of Latin and Cyrillic characters.
Charis is similar to Bitstream Charter, one of the first fonts designed
specifically for laser printers. It is highly readable and holds up well in
less-than-ideal reproduction environments. It also has a full set of styles
â regular, italic, bold, bold italic â and so is more useful in general
publishing than Doulos SIL. Charis is a serif proportionally spaced font
optimized for readability in long printed documents.
The Charis SIL Compact fonts were derived from Charis SIL using SIL TypeTuner,
by setting the âLine spacingâ feature to âTightâ, and they cannot be
TypeTuned
again. They may exhibit some diacritics clipping on screen (but should print
fine).
%prep
%setup -q -n %{archivename}
for txt in *.txt ; do
fold -s $txt $txt.new
sed -i 's/\r//' $txt.new
touch -r $txt $txt.new
mv $txt.new $txt
done
%build
%install
rm -fr %{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}
ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} \
%{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/%{fontconf}
%clean
rm -fr %{buildroot}
%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf
%doc *.txt
%changelog
* Sat May 23 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 4.106-1
â Initial release
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/F-11/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- .cvsignore 26 May 2009 22:29:34 - 1.1
+++ .cvsignore 27 May 2009 19:11:41 - 1.2
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+CharisSILCompact4.106.zip
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/F-11/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- sources 26 May 2009 22:29:34 - 1.1
+++ sources 27 May 2009 19:11:41 - 1.2
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+d48c3a1c191891f0347764d1a005b7a3 CharisSILCompact4.106.zip
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/devel import.log, NONE, 1.1 sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf, NONE, 1.1 sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1263/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore sources
Added Files:
import.log sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf
sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec
Log Message:
initial import
--- NEW FILE import.log ---
sil-charis-compact-fonts-4_106-1_fc12:HEAD:sil-charis-compact-fonts-4.106-1.fc12.src.rpm:1243451404
--- NEW FILE sil-charis-compact-fonts-fontconfig.conf ---
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM ../fonts.dtd
fontconfig
alias
familyserif/family
prefer
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/prefer
/alias
alias
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
default
familyserif/family
/default
/alias
alias binding=same
familyBitstream Charter/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
alias binding=same
familyCharis SIL Literacy/family
accept
familyCharis SIL Compact/family
/accept
/alias
/fontconfig
--- NEW FILE sil-charis-compact-fonts.spec ---
%global fontname sil-charis-compact
%global fontconf 61-%{fontname}.conf
%global archivename CharisSILCompact
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 4.106
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: A version of Charis SIL with tighter line spacing
Group: User Interface/X
License: OFL
URL: http://scripts.sil.org/CharisSILFont
# Actual download URL
#
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/render_download.php?site_id=nrsiformat=filemedia_id=%{archivename}.zipfilename=%{archivename}%{version}.zip
Source0: %{archivename}%{version}.zip
Source1: %{name}-fontconfig.conf
BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel
Requires: fontpackages-filesystem
%description
Charis SIL provides glyphs for a wide range of Latin and Cyrillic characters.
Charis is similar to Bitstream Charter, one of the first fonts designed
specifically for laser printers. It is highly readable and holds up well in
less-than-ideal reproduction environments. It also has a full set of styles
â regular, italic, bold, bold italic â and so is more useful in general
publishing than Doulos SIL. Charis is a serif proportionally spaced font
optimized for readability in long printed documents.
The Charis SIL Compact fonts were derived from Charis SIL using SIL TypeTuner,
by setting the âLine spacingâ feature to âTightâ, and they cannot be
TypeTuned
again. They may exhibit some diacritics clipping on screen (but should print
fine).
%prep
%setup -q -n %{archivename}
for txt in *.txt ; do
fold -s $txt $txt.new
sed -i 's/\r//' $txt.new
touch -r $txt $txt.new
mv $txt.new $txt
done
%build
%install
rm -fr %{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}
ln -s %{_fontconfig_templatedir}/%{fontconf} \
%{buildroot}%{_fontconfig_confdir}/%{fontconf}
%clean
rm -fr %{buildroot}
%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf
%doc *.txt
%changelog
* Sat May 23 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 4.106-1
â Initial release
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- .cvsignore 26 May 2009 22:29:34 - 1.1
+++ .cvsignore 27 May 2009 19:10:45 - 1.2
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+CharisSILCompact4.106.zip
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-compact-fonts/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -p -r1.1 -r1.2
--- sources 26 May 2009 22:29:34 - 1.1
+++ sources 27 May 2009 19:10:45 - 1.2
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+d48c3a1c191891f0347764d1a005b7a3 CharisSILCompact4.106.zip
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel bitstream-vera-fonts.spec, 1.15, 1.16 import.log, 1.4, 1.5
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11538/devel
Modified Files:
bitstream-vera-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
clean up pre-F11 compatibility metapackage goo
Index: bitstream-vera-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/bitstream-vera-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -r1.15 -r1.16
--- bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 24 Feb 2009 04:53:12 - 1.15
+++ bitstream-vera-fonts.spec 23 May 2009 13:07:05 - 1.16
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ at %{url} for details.
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 1.10
-Release: 16%{?dist}
+Release: 17%{?dist}
Summary: Bitstream Vera fonts
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -25,21 +25,10 @@ BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel
%common_desc
-%package compat
-Summary: Bitstream Vera, compatibility
-
-Obsoletes: bitstream-vera-fonts 1.10-9
-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
-the new package split. It will be removed after one distribution release cycle,
-please do not reference it or depend on it in any way.
-
-
%package common
-Summary: Common files of the Bitstream Vera font set
-Requires: fontpackages-filesystem
+Summary: Common files of the Bitstream Vera font set
+Requires: fontpackages-filesystem
+Obsoletes: %{name}-compat 1.10-17
%description common
%common_desc
@@ -106,16 +95,19 @@ install -m 0644 -p *.ttf %{buildroot}%{_
rm -fr %{buildroot}
-%files compat
-
-
%files common
%defattr(0644,root,root,0755)
%doc *.TXT
%changelog
-* Mon Feb 23 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 1.10-16
+* Sat May 23 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 1.10-17
+â remove pre-F11 compatibility metapackage
+
+
+* Mon Feb 23 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
+- 1.10-16
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Feb 16 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -p -r1.4 -r1.5
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:28:35 - 1.4
+++ import.log 23 May 2009 13:07:05 - 1.5
@@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-12_fc11:HEAD:b
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
bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-15_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-15.fc11.src.rpm:1235377691
+bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-17_fc12:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-17.fc12.src.rpm:1243083967
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel dejavu-fonts.spec, 1.100, 1.101 import.log, 1.15, 1.16
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13129/devel
Modified Files:
dejavu-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
clean up pre-F11 compatibility metapackage goo
Index: dejavu-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/dejavu-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.100
retrieving revision 1.101
diff -u -p -r1.100 -r1.101
--- dejavu-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 18:51:58 - 1.100
+++ dejavu-fonts.spec 23 May 2009 13:14:43 - 1.101
@@ -17,18 +17,10 @@ The DejaVu font set is based on the âB
purpose is to provide a wider range of characters, while maintaining the \
original style, using an open collaborative development process.
-# Compat description
-%global compat_desc \
-This package only exists to help transition pre 2.26-3 DejaVu users to the new\
-package split. It will be removed after one distribution release cycle, please\
-do not reference it or depend on it in any way.\
-\
-It can be safely uninstalled.
-
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 2.29
-Release: 2%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
+Release: 3%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
Summary: DejaVu fonts
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -50,38 +42,13 @@ BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel
%common_desc
-%package compat
-Summary: DejaVu fonts compatibility package
-
-Obsoletes: dejavu-fonts 2.26-3
-Obsoletes: dejavu-fonts-experimental 2.26-3
-
-Requires: %{fontname}-sans-fonts
-Requires: %{fontname}-sans-mono-fonts
-Requires: %{fontname}-serif-fonts
-
-%description compat
-%compat_desc
-
-
-%package lgc-compat
-Summary: DejaVu fonts, LGC compatibility package
-
-Obsoletes: dejavu-lgc-fonts 2.26-3
-
-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 the Dejavu font set
Requires: fontpackages-filesystem
Obsoletes: dejavu-fonts-doc 2.26-6
+Obsoletes: %{name}-compat 2.29-3
+Obsoletes: %{name}-lgc-compat 2.29-3
%description common
%common_desc
@@ -231,10 +198,6 @@ done
rm -fr %{buildroot}
-%files compat
-%files lgc-compat
-
-
%files common
%defattr(0644,root,root,0755)
%doc AUTHORS BUGS LICENSE NEWS README
@@ -242,7 +205,12 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%changelog
-* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 2.29-2
+* Sat May 23 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 1.29-3
+â remove pre-F11 compatibility metapackage
+
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 2.29-2
â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
* Sat Mar 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.15
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -r1.15 -r1.16
--- import.log 15 Mar 2009 18:51:59 - 1.15
+++ import.log 23 May 2009 13:14:43 - 1.16
@@ -13,3 +13,4 @@ dejavu-fonts-2_28-4_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fon
dejavu-fonts-2_28-5_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-5.fc11.src.rpm:123533
dejavu-fonts-2_29-1_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-1.fc11.src.rpm:1237057458
dejavu-fonts-2_29-2_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-2.fc11.src.rpm:1237143073
+dejavu-fonts-2_29-3_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-3.fc11.src.rpm:1243084445
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel .cvsignore, 1.2, 1.3 import.log, 1.2, 1.3 sil-charis-fonts.spec, 1.4, 1.5 sources, 1.2, 1.3
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv22328/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore import.log sil-charis-fonts.spec sources
Log Message:
4.106
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- .cvsignore 27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.2
+++ .cvsignore 21 May 2009 18:11:58 - 1.3
@@ -1 +1 @@
-CharisSIL4.104.zip
+CharisSIL4.106.zip
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 09:01:05 - 1.2
+++ import.log 21 May 2009 18:11:59 - 1.3
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-6_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-6.fc11.src.rpm:1233040224
sil-charis-fonts-4_104-7_fc11:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.104-7.fc11.src.rpm:1235379642
+sil-charis-fonts-4_106-1_fc12:HEAD:sil-charis-fonts-4.106-1.fc12.src.rpm:1242929489
Index: sil-charis-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/sil-charis-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -p -r1.4 -r1.5
--- sil-charis-fonts.spec 26 Feb 2009 00:59:58 - 1.4
+++ sil-charis-fonts.spec 21 May 2009 18:11:59 - 1.5
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
%global archivename CharisSIL
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
-Version: 4.104
-Release: 8%{?dist}
+Version: 4.106
+Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: A serif smart font similar to Bitstream Charter
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -66,10 +66,14 @@ rm -fr %{buildroot}
%_font_pkg -f %{fontconf} *.ttf
-%doc *.txt *.pdf
+%doc *.txt
%changelog
+* Fri May 21 2009 nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 4.106-1
+â This version supports Unicode 5.1 and adds support for Small capitals
+
* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 4.104-8
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sil-charis-fonts/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -p -r1.2 -r1.3
--- sources 27 Jan 2009 07:14:18 - 1.2
+++ sources 21 May 2009 18:11:59 - 1.3
@@ -1 +1 @@
-acc153c243b90e3e5d0bb53476ab894e CharisSIL4.104.zip
+045aea5116c6c20e5b84e165d9727f0c CharisSIL4.106.zip
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/linux-libertine-fonts/devel import.log, 1.1, 1.2 linux-libertine-fonts.spec, 1.11, 1.12
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/linux-libertine-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20797/devel
Modified Files:
import.log linux-libertine-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/linux-libertine-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- import.log 3 Sep 2008 21:23:24 - 1.1
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 18:46:06 - 1.2
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
linux-libertine-fonts-2_7_9-2_fc10:HEAD:linux-libertine-fonts-2.7.9-2.fc10.src.rpm:1220476988
+linux-libertine-fonts-4_1_8-3_fc11:HEAD:linux-libertine-fonts-4.1.8-3.fc11.src.rpm:1237142709
Index: linux-libertine-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/linux-libertine-fonts/devel/linux-libertine-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.11
retrieving revision 1.12
diff -u -r1.11 -r1.12
--- linux-libertine-fonts.spec 25 Feb 2009 20:32:48 - 1.11
+++ linux-libertine-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 18:46:06 - 1.12
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
Name: linux-libertine-fonts
Version: 4.1.8
-Release: 2%{?dist}
+Release: 3%{?dist}
Summary: Linux Libertine Open Fonts
Group: User Interface/X
License: GPLv2+ with exceptions or OFL
@@ -79,6 +79,9 @@
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 4.1.8-3
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Wed Feb 25 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 4.1.8-2
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel dejavu-fonts.spec, 1.99, 1.100 import.log, 1.14, 1.15
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv22106/devel
Modified Files:
dejavu-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: dejavu-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/dejavu-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.99
retrieving revision 1.100
diff -u -r1.99 -r1.100
--- dejavu-fonts.spec 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.99
+++ dejavu-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 18:51:58 - 1.100
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 2.29
-Release: 1%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
+Release: 2%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
Summary: DejaVu fonts
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -242,6 +242,9 @@
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 2.29-2
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Sat Mar 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 2.29-1
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.14
retrieving revision 1.15
diff -u -r1.14 -r1.15
--- import.log 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.14
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 18:51:59 - 1.15
@@ -12,3 +12,4 @@
dejavu-fonts-2_28-4_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-4.fc11.src.rpm:1234084218
dejavu-fonts-2_28-5_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-5.fc11.src.rpm:123533
dejavu-fonts-2_29-1_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-1.fc11.src.rpm:1237057458
+dejavu-fonts-2_29-2_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-2.fc11.src.rpm:1237143073
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/oldstandard-sfd-fonts/devel import.log, 1.1, 1.2 oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec, 1.2, 1.3
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/oldstandard-sfd-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv24468/devel
Modified Files:
import.log oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/oldstandard-sfd-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- import.log 1 Feb 2009 08:55:25 - 1.1
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 19:08:59 - 1.2
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
oldstandard-sfd-fonts-2_0_2-3_fc10:HEAD:oldstandard-sfd-fonts-2.0.2-3.fc10.src.rpm:1233478160
+oldstandard-sfd-fonts-2_0_2-5_fc11:HEAD:oldstandard-sfd-fonts-2.0.2-5.fc11.src.rpm:1237144107
Index: oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/oldstandard-sfd-fonts/devel/oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3
--- oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec 26 Feb 2009 08:03:34 - 1.2
+++ oldstandard-sfd-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 19:08:59 - 1.3
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
Name: %{fontname}-sfd-fonts
Version: 2.0.2
-Release: 4%{?dist}
+Release: 5%{?dist}
Summary: Old Standard True-Type Fonts
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -80,6 +80,9 @@
%dir %{_fontdir}/
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 2.0.2-5
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Thu Feb 26 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 2.0.2-4
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel apanov-edrip-fonts.spec, 1.6, 1.7 import.log, 1.4, 1.5
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv26171/devel
Modified Files:
apanov-edrip-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: apanov-edrip-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel/apanov-edrip-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.6
retrieving revision 1.7
diff -u -r1.6 -r1.7
--- apanov-edrip-fonts.spec 24 Feb 2009 01:19:20 - 1.6
+++ apanov-edrip-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 19:16:03 - 1.7
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 20081007
-Release: 7%{?dist}
+Release: 8%{?dist}
Summary: A decorative contrast sans-serif font
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -61,6 +61,9 @@
%doc *.txt README
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 20081007-8
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Mon Feb 23 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 20081007-7
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:26:11 - 1.4
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 19:16:03 - 1.5
@@ -2,3 +2,4 @@
apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-4_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-4.fc11.src.rpm:1234085608
apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6.fc11.src.rpm:1235299600
apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6.fc11.src.rpm:1235377546
+apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-8_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-8.fc11.src.rpm:1237144512
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/sj-fonts/devel import.log,1.1,1.2 sj-fonts.spec,1.3,1.4
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/sj-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv27768/devel
Modified Files:
import.log sj-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sj-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- import.log 27 Jan 2009 22:07:50 - 1.1
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 19:25:54 - 1.2
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
sj-fonts-2_0_2-1_fc10:HEAD:sj-fonts-2.0.2-1.fc10.src.rpm:1233094032
+sj-fonts-2_0_2-4_fc11:HEAD:sj-fonts-2.0.2-4.fc11.src.rpm:1237144996
Index: sj-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/sj-fonts/devel/sj-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4
--- sj-fonts.spec 28 Feb 2009 20:04:45 - 1.3
+++ sj-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 19:25:54 - 1.4
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Name: %{fontname}-fonts
Version: 2.0.2
-Release: 3%{?dist}
+Release: 4%{?dist}
Summary: Two fonts by Steve Jordi released under the GPL
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -99,6 +99,9 @@
%dir %{_fontdir}
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 2.0.2-4
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Sat Feb 28 2009 Sven Lankes s...@lank.es - 2.0.2-3
- Adjust fontforge call to fix ftbfs
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec, 1.7, 1.8 import.log, 1.5, 1.6
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv1590/devel
Modified Files:
apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel/apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.7
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -r1.7 -r1.8
--- apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec24 Feb 2009 01:20:13 - 1.7
+++ apanov-heuristica-fonts.spec15 Mar 2009 20:04:01 - 1.8
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
Version: 20090125
-Release: 4%{?dist}
+Release: 5%{?dist}
Summary: Heuristica font
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -58,6 +58,9 @@
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 20090125-5
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Mon Feb 23 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 20090125-4
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.5
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -u -r1.5 -r1.6
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:27:24 - 1.5
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 20:04:01 - 1.6
@@ -3,3 +3,4 @@
apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-1_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-1.fc11.src.rpm:1233345796
apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3.fc11.src.rpm:1235299849
apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3.fc11.src.rpm:1235377618
+apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-5_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-5.fc11.src.rpm:1237147311
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/cf-bonveno-fonts/devel cf-bonveno-fonts.spec, 1.2, 1.3 import.log, 1.1, 1.2
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/cf-bonveno-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv2779/devel
Modified Files:
cf-bonveno-fonts.spec import.log
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: cf-bonveno-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/cf-bonveno-fonts/devel/cf-bonveno-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3
--- cf-bonveno-fonts.spec 24 Feb 2009 07:04:31 - 1.2
+++ cf-bonveno-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 20:11:24 - 1.3
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
Name: %{fontname}-fonts
Version: 1.1
-Release: 4%{?dist}
+Release: 5%{?dist}
Summary: A fun font by Barry Schwartz
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -72,6 +72,9 @@
%dir %{_fontdir}/
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 1.1-5
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Mon Feb 23 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 1.1-4
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/cf-bonveno-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- import.log 29 Jan 2009 07:43:31 - 1.1
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 20:11:24 - 1.2
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
cf-bonveno-fonts-1_1-3_fc10:HEAD:cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-3.fc10.src.rpm:1233214810
+cf-bonveno-fonts-1_1-5_fc11:HEAD:cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-5.fc11.src.rpm:1237147830
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel import.log, 1.1, 1.2 serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec, 1.3, 1.4
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv4351/devel
Modified Files:
import.log serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec
Log Message:
Try to build with F11 fontforge
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.1 -r1.2
--- import.log 13 Jan 2009 21:33:38 - 1.1
+++ import.log 15 Mar 2009 20:17:23 - 1.2
@@ -1 +1,2 @@
serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0_5-1_fc10:HEAD:serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm:1231882386
+serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0_5_1-2_fc11:HEAD:serafettin-cartoon-fonts-0.5.1-2.fc11.src.rpm:1237148225
Index: serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec
===
RCS file:
/cvs/extras/rpms/serafettin-cartoon-fonts/devel/serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4
--- serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec 28 Feb 2009 18:30:03 - 1.3
+++ serafettin-cartoon-fonts.spec 15 Mar 2009 20:17:23 - 1.4
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
Name: %{fontname}-fonts
Version: 0.5.1
-Release: 1%{?dist}
+Release: 2%{?dist}
Summary: Sans-serif Cartoon Fonts
Group: User Interface/X
License: GPLv2+
@@ -56,6 +56,9 @@
%changelog
+* Sun Mar 15 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net - 0.5.1-2
+â Make sure F11 font packages have been built with F11 fontforge
+
* Sat Feb 28 2009 Orcan Ogetbil oget [DOT] fedora [AT] gmail [DOT] com -
0.5.1-1
- New version with cleanups and fixes
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel .cvsignore, 1.52, 1.53 dejavu-fonts.spec, 1.98, 1.99 import.log, 1.13, 1.14 sources, 1.52, 1.53
Author: nim
Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv30004/devel
Modified Files:
.cvsignore dejavu-fonts.spec import.log sources
Log Message:
2.29
Index: .cvsignore
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/.cvsignore,v
retrieving revision 1.52
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -r1.52 -r1.53
--- .cvsignore 21 Dec 2008 17:18:47 - 1.52
+++ .cvsignore 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.53
@@ -1 +1 @@
-dejavu-fonts-2.28.tar.bz2
+dejavu-fonts-2.29.tar.bz2
Index: dejavu-fonts.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/dejavu-fonts.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.98
retrieving revision 1.99
diff -u -r1.98 -r1.99
--- dejavu-fonts.spec 24 Feb 2009 11:21:21 - 1.98
+++ dejavu-fonts.spec 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.99
@@ -27,8 +27,8 @@
Name:%{fontname}-fonts
-Version: 2.28
-Release: 6%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
+Version: 2.29
+Release: 1%{?alphatag}%{?dist}
Summary: DejaVu fonts
Group: User Interface/X
@@ -242,8 +242,12 @@
%changelog
-* Tue Feb 24 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
- 2.28-6
-- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
+* Sat Mar 14 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
+- 2.29-1
+
+* Tue Feb 24 2009 Fedora Release Engineering rel-...@lists.fedoraproject.org
+- 2.28-6
+â Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild
* Mon Feb 16 2009 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
- 2.28-5
Index: import.log
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v
retrieving revision 1.13
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -r1.13 -r1.14
--- import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:29:58 - 1.13
+++ import.log 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.14
@@ -11,3 +11,4 @@
dejavu-fonts-2_28-3_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-3.fc11.src.rpm:1232147011
dejavu-fonts-2_28-4_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-4.fc11.src.rpm:1234084218
dejavu-fonts-2_28-5_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-5.fc11.src.rpm:123533
+dejavu-fonts-2_29-1_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.29-1.fc11.src.rpm:1237057458
Index: sources
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/sources,v
retrieving revision 1.52
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -r1.52 -r1.53
--- sources 21 Dec 2008 17:18:48 - 1.52
+++ sources 14 Mar 2009 19:05:29 - 1.53
@@ -1 +1 @@
-fff585e19115dbe76746f6df66ab0dc6 dejavu-fonts-2.28.tar.bz2
+4728d26da8daa5b4ebe87c428d745b06 dejavu-fonts-2.29.tar.bz2
___
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list
Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel import.log,1.3,1.4
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv10728/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-edrip-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- import.log 22 Feb 2009 10:47:08 - 1.3 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:26:11 - 1.4 @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-3.fc11.src.rpm:1233039319 apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-4_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-4.fc11.src.rpm:1234085608 apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6.fc11.src.rpm:1235299600 +apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6_fc11:HEAD:apanov-edrip-fonts-20081007-6.fc11.src.rpm:1235377546 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel import.log,1.4,1.5
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11072/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/apanov-heuristica-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.4 retrieving revision 1.5 diff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 --- import.log 22 Feb 2009 10:51:14 - 1.4 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:27:24 - 1.5 @@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ apanov-heuristica-fonts-20081109-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20081109-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229540973 apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-1_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-1.fc11.src.rpm:1233345796 apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3.fc11.src.rpm:1235299849 +apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3_fc11:HEAD:apanov-heuristica-fonts-20090125-3.fc11.src.rpm:1235377618 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel import.log,1.3,1.4
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11328/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/bitstream-vera-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- import.log 15 Jan 2009 23:43:32 - 1.3 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:28:35 - 1.4 @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ 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 +bitstream-vera-fonts-1_10-15_fc11:HEAD:bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-15.fc11.src.rpm:1235377691 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel import.log,1.12,1.13
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv11923/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/dejavu-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.12 retrieving revision 1.13 diff -u -r1.12 -r1.13 --- import.log 8 Feb 2009 09:12:06 - 1.12 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:29:58 - 1.13 @@ -10,3 +10,4 @@ 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 dejavu-fonts-2_28-4_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-4.fc11.src.rpm:1234084218 +dejavu-fonts-2_28-5_fc11:HEAD:dejavu-fonts-2.28-5.fc11.src.rpm:123533 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/fontpackages/devel import.log,1.11,1.12
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv12915/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/fontpackages/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.11 retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -r1.11 -r1.12 --- import.log 19 Feb 2009 05:55:46 - 1.11 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:32:21 - 1.12 @@ -9,3 +9,4 @@ fontpackages-1_19-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.19-1.fc11.src.rpm:1234809006 fontpackages-1_19-2_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.19-2.fc11.src.rpm:1234813732 fontpackages-1_20-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.20-1.fc11.src.rpm:1234998636 +fontpackages-1_20-1_fc11:HEAD:fontpackages-1.20-1.fc11.src.rpm:1235377920 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-ambrosia-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-ambrosia-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13197/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-ambrosia-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:25:25 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:33:30 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-1_fc10:HEAD:gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-1.fc10.src.rpm:1215804309 gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-3_fc11:HEAD:gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229541904 +gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-4_fc11:HEAD:gfs-ambrosia-fonts-20080624-4.fc11.src.rpm:1235377988 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-artemisia-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-artemisia-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13498/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-artemisia-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:27:14 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:34:43 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-7_fc10:HEAD:gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-7.fc10.src.rpm:1215807827 gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-9_fc11:HEAD:gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-9.fc11.src.rpm:1229542008 +gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-artemisia-fonts-20070415-10.fc11.src.rpm:1235378061 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-baskerville-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-baskerville-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv13836/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-baskerville-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:28:57 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:35:54 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-8_fc10:HEAD:gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-8.fc10.src.rpm:1215808097 gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-10.fc11.src.rpm:1229542115 +gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-11_fc11:HEAD:gfs-baskerville-fonts-20070327-11.fc11.src.rpm:1235378131 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14248/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:30:55 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:37:07 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-7_fc10:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-7.fc10.src.rpm:1215808489 gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-9_fc11:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-9.fc11.src.rpm:1229542223 +gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts-20070415-10.fc11.src.rpm:1235378203 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-bodoni-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-bodoni-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14625/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-bodoni-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:32:35 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:38:19 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-6_fc10:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-6.fc10.src.rpm:1215808757 gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-8_fc11:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-8.fc11.src.rpm:1229542332 +gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-9_fc11:HEAD:gfs-bodoni-fonts-20070415-9.fc11.src.rpm:1235378277 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-complutum-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-complutum-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv14901/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-complutum-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:34:18 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:39:29 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-8_fc10:HEAD:gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-8.fc10.src.rpm:1215809112 gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-10.fc11.src.rpm:1229542434 +gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-11_fc11:HEAD:gfs-complutum-fonts-20070413-11.fc11.src.rpm:1235378349 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-didot-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-didot-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15618/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-didot-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:37:36 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:42:22 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-7_fc10:HEAD:gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-7.fc10.src.rpm:1215809267 gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-9_fc11:HEAD:gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-9.fc11.src.rpm:1229542633 +gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-didot-fonts-20070616-10.fc11.src.rpm:1235378495 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-eustace-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-eustace-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15961/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-eustace-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:39:21 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:43:32 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-1_fc10:HEAD:gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-1.fc10.src.rpm:1215850441 gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-3_fc11:HEAD:gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229542735 +gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-4_fc11:HEAD:gfs-eustace-fonts-20080303-4.fc11.src.rpm:1235378590 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-garaldus-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-garaldus-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv16578/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-garaldus-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:42:45 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:46:04 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-1_fc10:HEAD:gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-1.fc10.src.rpm:1216755659 gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-3_fc11:HEAD:gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229542939 +gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-4_fc11:HEAD:gfs-garaldus-fonts-20080707-4.fc11.src.rpm:1235378734 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-gazis-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-gazis-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv16859/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-gazis-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:44:27 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:47:19 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-3_fc10:HEAD:gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-3.fc10.src.rpm:1215809328 gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-5_fc11:HEAD:gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-5.fc11.src.rpm:1229543045 +gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-6_fc11:HEAD:gfs-gazis-fonts-20080318-6.fc11.src.rpm:1235378814 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-jackson-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-jackson-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17113/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-jackson-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:46:11 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:48:31 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-1_fc10:HEAD:gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-1.fc10.src.rpm:1216483310 gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-3_fc11:HEAD:gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229543149 +gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-4_fc11:HEAD:gfs-jackson-fonts-20080303-4.fc11.src.rpm:123537 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-neohellenic-fonts/devel import.log,1.3,1.4
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-neohellenic-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17378/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-neohellenic-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.3 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.3 -r1.4 --- import.log 22 Feb 2009 10:42:06 - 1.3 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:49:44 - 1.4 @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20070415-6_fc10:HEAD:gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20070415-6.fc10.src.rpm:1215809363 gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20070415-8_fc11:HEAD:gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20070415-8.fc11.src.rpm:1229543250 gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20081217-1_fc11:HEAD:gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20081217-1.fc11.src.rpm:1235299287 +gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20081217-1_fc11:HEAD:gfs-neohellenic-fonts-20081217-1.fc11.src.rpm:1235378962 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-nicefore-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-nicefore-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv17624/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-nicefore-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:49:50 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:50:54 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-1_fc10:HEAD:gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-1.fc10.src.rpm:1216482262 gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-3_fc11:HEAD:gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-3.fc11.src.rpm:1229543362 +gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-4_fc11:HEAD:gfs-nicefore-fonts-20080303-4.fc11.src.rpm:1235379032 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
rpms/gfs-porson-fonts/devel import.log,1.2,1.3
Author: nim Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-porson-fonts/devel In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv18099/devel Modified Files: import.log Log Message: F11 mass rebuild Index: import.log === RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/gfs-porson-fonts/devel/import.log,v retrieving revision 1.2 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.2 -r1.3 --- import.log 17 Dec 2008 19:53:31 - 1.2 +++ import.log 23 Feb 2009 08:53:19 - 1.3 @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@ gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-8_fc10:HEAD:gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-8.fc10.src.rpm:1215809463 gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-10_fc11:HEAD:gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-10.fc11.src.rpm:1229543577 +gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-11_fc11:HEAD:gfs-porson-fonts-20060908-11.fc11.src.rpm:1235379178 ___ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list Fedora-fonts-bugs-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
