Hi, 老孫, the master of strategy, :-) I was not expecting to exchange email from 2nd century BC person without Time-machine.
Watch out for your enemy spreading bad rumor on you. As I understand, many of ancient Chinese gurus were killed by their master due to such rumor. On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 07:44:09PM +0200, "Sun Tzu (孫子)" wrote: > Osamu Aoki schreef: > > Package: latex-cjk-common > > Version: 4.7.0+git20080122-1 > > Severity: important > > Tags: patch > > > > Hi, I heard > > > > | for Lenny we'd like to stop supporting two freetype packages in the | > > archive. In this case your package build-depends on freetype1-tools. | | > > freetype1 has been in oldlibs for Etch, it has very few reverse deps | > > left and we'll try to phase it out now. | | Please adapt your package, so > > that it links against the regular freetype | package. > > > > This was filed on several DDP documents. As I checked the root cause, it > > was traced to the recommendation of this package. > > > > Please apply patch and update your package. > > The patch won't help; CJK *really* needs these .sfd files. That is a > "conditio sine qua non" to get extra fonts working with CJK. If you say so, I trust it is true. But funny thing is those people who is pushing FT2 transition did NMU with success. I see PS/PDF files OK. (I do not know .sfd files... is this Spline Font Database? In what process these are used? What happens without it?) > As long as the .sfd files are not available in another package > (texlive-* or whatever), and the ttf2* are not linked to FT2 (which will > probably never happen), I'm inclined to still recommend FT1 for > latex-cjk-common, and build-depend on it for latex-cjk-chinese-arphic. > The reason it is only recommended for latex-cjk-common is that you will > only need it if you want to build these fonts yourself. But perhaps a > "Depends" is a better solution, because most people need it anyway. > > In fact, FT1 shouldn't be in oldlibs at all, IMHO. FT2 doesn't have > some of the features of FT1 and isn't a replacement for these tools. It > only looks like FT2 is an upgrade to FT1, but it isn't in some important > aspects. > > You might try to convince Werner Lemberg and his colleagues to implement the > ttf2* tools for FT2. > > So if you don't mind, I will downgrade the severity of this bug to > "wishlist", and remove the "patch" tag. Please from me. > P.S.: as for DDP, I'm currently testing xCJK, which will be included in > a next upload of latex-cjk-*, which has XeLaTeX support. It supports > TTF directly, so you won't have any of these font problems anymore. I'm > trying out several DFSG-free fonts now, to see which ones are good > enough to recommend. I have updated debiandoc-sgml to support UTF-8 as long as we get proper LaTex header files for each languages. HTML and Plain text are fully functional. One thing I worry is ghostscript for CJK. Does it require presense of CID font support data which is non-free? Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
