https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1806272
Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #19 from Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Parag Nemade from comment #18) > we have langpacks-core-fonts-<langcode> packages to use. They provide > pre-defined default font for that <langcode>. If packages want to use > particular font package they need to pull it explicitly. But if there is no > such particular font demand then default langpacks-core-font-<langocode> can > be used. Sure, but here we have the case where <langcode> is not defined (the package wants some default fonts installed, it does not care which ones, as long as some default is installed). What dep should the package use in this case? I can add the generic answer to this question to guidelines, but I need an answer i18n, as maintainer of the distribution default font lists, is comfortable with > Yesterday I first tried to use new guidelines and > convert some fonts packages and there I found about change in directory > structure and fontconfig file format. The new fontconfig format is not part of the guidelines change, you can use the usual format, and the usual format is the one documented in guidelines and default templates. Just set %fontconfs not %fontconfsngs. The new format exists in my own packages as a stopgap demonstrator because Akira wanted proof the current fontconfig format does not scale to current needs. Also, there was no way in hell I could write and check and proof and maintain by hand the multi-hundred/multi-thousand lines of configuration required by some of the packaged fonts. Lastly, the current syntax does not work at all unless you have perfect knowledge of the styles that will be declared by your font files, so it needs brittle workarounds in %install to generate a conf file that will only work with the exact files installed. Simple font packages can be handled with the legacy syntax (though it is overly verbose and painful). Complex (rich fonts) like Plex Sans, Merriweather, Droid, Noto, etc are quite impossible to maintain without something like it. Also, I don’t intend to maintain the new syntax generator long term. Fontconfig syntax fixes belong in fontconfig. The generator is already way more complex than I imagined at first, because font makers are behaving way worse than, making current fontconfig syntax that more inadequate and harder to workaround outside the engine itself. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ fonts-bugs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
