Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > --- On Wed, 26/3/08, Huw Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snipped> >>> If ukai is affected, I would suspect uming (also from >> Arphic) >>> would be the same? and how many non-english fonts one >> want to >>> "work-around" like this? >> I've not seen any problems with uming. Most >> 'non-english' fonts will >> work fine. There's something very specific about ukai >> that causes >> native gdiplis to have problems. >> >>>> Actually I've just attached a hack to the >> bug, try that >>>> instead. >>> Thanks - but I also have uming, and a a fair number of >> other fonts >>> shipped from fedora for non-english. (over 100). >> Please try the patch and report back. > > Yes, your patch works alright - it is just ukai and nothing else. I'll put it > on the bug report as well. Ukai (or rather, the original Arphic kai font) was > the first > commercial quality chinese font released under an open license, so you are > going to > have a lot of people - 20% of the world is Chinese, and also linux is rather > more officially popular in China due to licensing/cost/idealological reasons > and some > non-chinese will install "everything" - being affected by this. I don't know > if it > is ukai-specific or any Arphic kai derivatives, but if it affects any Arphic > kai derivatives, filtering by font name as your patch did won't be effective. > Looks like a time to start blacklisting fonts then. If the font is invalid and does not work even on windows yet it is available in the system - that's the only thing Wine can do. Or just contact all distros to remove it. Or request packagers to refuse installing Wine if said font found in the system.
Vitaliy.