Bug#551507: ttf-dzongkha: Hints point to Jomolhari.ttf, not Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
Christian Perrier wrote: Quoting Nicolas Spalinger (nicolas_spalin...@sil.org): As a quick note, I'd recommend also taking advantage of the update to double-check and adjust the metadata as shown on our current review: http://pkg-fonts.alioth.debian.org/review/fnt-75f85d518458d8846ffd35cbc1e16adc.html Looks like Description, Designer URL and License Description need to be adjusted to reflect the intent of the upstream. And is the font still in alpha? IMHO the version number should reflect the status. There are also specimens on the upstream site which might usefully be included in the package. I agree. However, I think all this belongs to Chris, in a possible new version (that, indeed, could be numbered 1.0). You are right, sorry if I was unclear but my suggestion was to take advantage of this interaction with Chris as the upstream author to respectfully ask for these updates as part of a new release. For the specimens hopefully we will soon be able to generate specimen for non-roman scripts in our weekly review. But IMHO it's still useful to have specimens in the package itself. Thanks, -- Nicolas Spalinger, NRSI volunteer Debian/Ubuntu font teams / OpenFontLibrary http://planet.open-fonts.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#551507: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#551507: ttf-dzongkha: Hints point to Jomolhari.ttf, not Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
Quoting Jakob Bohm (yawwuddeiboyoam...@jbohm.dk): /etc/defoma/hints/ttf-dzongka.hints tells the rest of Debian to look for the installed font in the file Jomolhari.ttf, but it is actually installed in a file named Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf . Thanks for the pointer. It will be the opportunity for me to upload a new package (I actually didn't update that package for squeeze as of now) with new fancy things such as moving to debhelper 7, etc. Also checking whether there is a new upstream version will be a good idea, indeed. CC'ing Chris (to know whether he released a new version of the Jomolhari font). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#551507: [Pkg-fonts-bugs] Bug#551507: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#551507: ttf-dzongkha: Hints point to Jomolhari.ttf, not Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
Christian Perrier wrote: Quoting Jakob Bohm (yawwuddeiboyoam...@jbohm.dk): /etc/defoma/hints/ttf-dzongka.hints tells the rest of Debian to look for the installed font in the file Jomolhari.ttf, but it is actually installed in a file named Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf . Thanks for the pointer. It will be the opportunity for me to upload a new package (I actually didn't update that package for squeeze as of now) with new fancy things such as moving to debhelper 7, etc. Also checking whether there is a new upstream version will be a good idea, indeed. CC'ing Chris (to know whether he released a new version of the Jomolhari font). As a quick note, I'd recommend also taking advantage of the update to double-check and adjust the metadata as shown on our current review: http://pkg-fonts.alioth.debian.org/review/fnt-75f85d518458d8846ffd35cbc1e16adc.html Looks like Description, Designer URL and License Description need to be adjusted to reflect the intent of the upstream. And is the font still in alpha? IMHO the version number should reflect the status. There are also specimens on the upstream site which might usefully be included in the package. Cheers, -- Nicolas Spalinger, NRSI volunteer Debian/Ubuntu font teams / OpenFontLibrary http://planet.open-fonts.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#551507: [Pkg-fonts-bugs] Bug#551507: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#551507: ttf-dzongkha: Hints point to Jomolhari.ttf, not Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
Quoting Nicolas Spalinger (nicolas_spalin...@sil.org): As a quick note, I'd recommend also taking advantage of the update to double-check and adjust the metadata as shown on our current review: http://pkg-fonts.alioth.debian.org/review/fnt-75f85d518458d8846ffd35cbc1e16adc.html Looks like Description, Designer URL and License Description need to be adjusted to reflect the intent of the upstream. And is the font still in alpha? IMHO the version number should reflect the status. There are also specimens on the upstream site which might usefully be included in the package. I agree. However, I think all this belongs to Chris, in a possible new version (that, indeed, could be numbered 1.0). signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#551507: ttf-dzongkha: Hints point to Jomolhari.ttf, not Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
Package: ttf-dzongkha Version: 0.3-1 Severity: grave Tags: patch Justification: renders package unusable /etc/defoma/hints/ttf-dzongka.hints tells the rest of Debian to look for the installed font in the file Jomolhari.ttf, but it is actually installed in a file named Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf . Because Debian packages are supposed to believe defoma when looking for fonts, policy compliant packages will not be able to use the package at all until this is fixed. I have attached a simplistic patch for the broken hints file. Please remember to keep the hints file up to date whenever you change file names or paths of the installed fonts! -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.3 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.31jbj3.4-43 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_DK.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_DK.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages ttf-dzongkha depends on: ii defoma 0.11.10-0.2 Debian Font Manager -- automatic f ttf-dzongkha recommends no packages. ttf-dzongkha suggests no packages. -- no debconf information --- hints.bad/ttf-dzongkha.hints2007-05-07 20:09:48.0 +0200 +++ hints/ttf-dzongkha.hints2009-10-18 18:27:59.0 +0200 @@ -2 +2 @@ -begin /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-dzongkha/Jomolhari.ttf +begin /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-dzongkha/Jomolhari-alpha3c-0605331.ttf
