https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Mark Pearson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Mark Pearson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|VERIFIED
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #12 from Mark Pearson ---
Got the thumbs up from China so we can close this.
Thanks!
Mark
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Report
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #11 from Mark Pearson ---
Sounds good - I've asked the team in China to have a look. Many thanks for all
the help
Mark
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen ---
(and F38 google-noto-serif-cjk-vf-fonts >= 2.001 is also available to install)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #9 from Jens
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #8 from Mark Pearson ---
Thanks Jens.
If we're already at a level that should meet the requirements I'm happy to
close this and then I assume when we get to testing Fedora39 the team in China
can confirm if any problems? I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen ---
(In reply to Jens Petersen from comment #5)
> I think the google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts-2.004 already in F38 should *cover*
> GB18030-2022 Level 2 according to the issue you list.
(Fixed typo: over ->
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen ---
I opened bug 2244390 for updating google-noto-serif-cjk-vf-fonts to 2.002
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|i18n-bugs@lists.fedoraproje |peter...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|p...@redhat.com |i18n-bugs@lists.fedoraproje
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
QA Contact|fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproj |
|ect.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #4 from Mark Pearson ---
I think that Noto Serif v2.002 release (based on
https://github.com/notofonts/noto-cjk/issues/252) fixes this
Can we put this on the todo list for a Fedora update please - it will make the
next preload
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen ---
(In reply to Mark Pearson from comment #2)
> I thought the 252 issue meant they were working on making them compliant.
Yes, that is a good find.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #2 from Mark Pearson ---
Thanks Jens - I thought they weren't in by default as I had to do a dnf install
on my machine to get them. I'll check on a fresh install as this one has been
upgraded from older versions.
On the official
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
--- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen ---
My immediate comment is just that we do install Google Noto CJK fonts by
default,
but those fonts are not (cannot be) officially certified for GB18030 afaik.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2230471
Jens Petersen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
18 matches
Mail list logo
