Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:55:14AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote: Why should packages that require a particular font package for operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font packages? Why did you not read the footnote that IMMEDIATELY followed the text you quoted? Why did you not read the text you just quoted? I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't installed in *both* locations. Thus, AbiWord installs on a machine without the fonts are *not useful* *at all*. sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/ OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss pgpKrPaXz3Bhn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
* Sam TH [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010507 00:11]: I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't installed in *both* locations. Thus, AbiWord installs on a machine without the fonts are *not useful* *at all*. Sam, please don't take offense at this: the way I see it, if program cannot function normally under circumstances that most X clients won't even notice, I tend to think program is broken. Taking Branden's proposal entirely in the abstract, it is simply codifying the way X was designed to run. Anything against this *is* a bug, because it is not keeping with the network transparency of X. However, if the AbiWord developers don't figure they will get around to fixing AbiWord any time soon, it sure would be a shame to keep AbiWord out of the distribution. Branden, would you have great compunction against making your current must a should? -- Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet.
Re: Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 04:47:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: (Later being after we work out a satisfactory way of specifying what must is meant to specify. Julian, I'd really appreciate it if you could propose something along those lines. But not in this thread...) My current order of priorities: (1) Finish entering my textual improvements into CVS (2) Make some progress on cleaning up the Policy bugs list (which is ever growing) In the meantime, I think Manoj is planning to convert policy to Docbook XML format. (3) Rewrite policy so that it's more comprehensible: its ordering (merger of policy + packaging) is really hard work. When I'm doing (3), I will make the changes to MUST and SHOULD which I've suggested, and will present it to this list for ratification. If the whole shebang is approved, then it can go in. But I don't want to put in the effort to make the changes at this point. Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:08:38AM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote: * Sam TH [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010507 00:11]: I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't installed in *both* locations. Thus, AbiWord installs on a machine without the fonts are *not useful* *at all*. Sam, please don't take offense at this: the way I see it, if program cannot function normally under circumstances that most X clients won't even notice, I tend to think program is broken. Well, it certainly would be nice to be able to fix this. But no one has come up with a good solution yet. Taking Branden's proposal entirely in the abstract, it is simply codifying the way X was designed to run. Anything against this *is* a bug, because it is not keeping with the network transparency of X. Unfortunately, X fonts aren't as nicely transparent as X apps. And since AbiWord needs to be able to guarantee the availability of certain fonts, this means those fonts need to be installed in a place AbiWord can find them. If we could expect that a decent set of printable fonts were shipped with all X installations, we wouldn't have that problem. But good luck getting that. However, if the AbiWord developers don't figure they will get around to fixing AbiWord any time soon, it sure would be a shame to keep AbiWord out of the distribution. Branden, would you have great compunction against making your current must a should? We'd love to fix AbiWord. But no one has come up with a good solution yet. (Actually, I think people have gotten both the fonts and the app to be served remotely, but that still requires that the fonts be installed on the same system.) sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/ OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss pgpUkT4kKs1OT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
Please pay attention to my Mail-Copies-To and X-No-CC headers this time. On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 02:20:54AM -0500, Sam TH wrote: Why did you not read the text you just quoted? I've never seen AbiWord work over remote X if the fonts weren't installed in *both* locations. Sounds like a bug in AbiWord. And perhaps you missed this part: + For the purposes of Debian Policy, a font for the X Window + System is one which is accessed via X protocol requests. + Fonts for the Linux console, for PostScript renderers, or + any other purpose, do not fit this definition. Any tool + which makes such fonts available to the X Window System, + however, must abide by this font policy. -- G. Branden Robinson | Men use thought only to justify their Debian GNU/Linux| wrong doings, and speech only to conceal [EMAIL PROTECTED] | their thoughts. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Voltaire pgpgtAkuJ0n3K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
close 91257 reopen 91257 thanks I am re-proposing this. The only change is the following two paragraphs: item Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be be in a separate binary package from any executables, libraries, or documentation (except that specific to the fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation of the package with which they are associated the font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. footnote This is because the X server may retrieve fonts from the local filesystem or over the network from an X font server; the Debian package system is empowered to deal only with the local filesystem. /footnote /item Here's the full diff with the above change: --- policy.sgml Sun Mar 25 01:34:33 2001 +++ policy.sgml.fonts Sun May 6 00:43:22 2001 @@ -6010,66 +6010,80 @@ p emPackages that provide fonts for the X Window System/em - must do a number of things to ensure that they are both - available without modification of the X or font server - configuration, and that they do not corrupt files used by - other font packages to register information about themselves. + footnote + For the purposes of Debian Policy, a font for the X Window + System is one which is accessed via X protocol requests. + Fonts for the Linux console, for PostScript renderers, or + any other purpose, do not fit this definition. Any tool + which makes such fonts available to the X Window System, + however, must abide by this font policy. + /footnote + must do a number of things to ensure that they are both available + without modification of the X or font server configuration, and + that they do not corrupt files used by other font packages to + register information about themselves. enumlist item - Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System - should be be in a separate binary package from any - executables, libraries, or documentation (except that - specific to the fonts shipped); if a program or - library is emunusable/em without one or more - specific fonts, the package containing the program or - library should declare a dependency on the package(s) - containing the font(s) it requires. - /item - item - BDF fonts should be converted to PCF fonts with the - ttbdftopcf/tt utility (available in the - ttxutils/tt package, ttgzip/ttped, and - placed in a directory that corresponds to their - resolution: + Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be + be in a separate binary package from any executables, + libraries, or documentation (except that specific to the + fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one + or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper + operation of the package with which they are associated the + font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely + provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be + used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. + footnote + This is because the X server may retrieve fonts + from the local filesystem or over the network from + an X font server; the Debian package system is + empowered to deal only with the local filesystem. + /footnote + /item + item + BDF fonts must be converted to PCF fonts with the + ttbdftopcf/tt utility (available in the ttxutils/tt + package, ttgzip/ttped, and placed in a directory that + corresponds to their resolution: list item - 100 dpi fonts should be placed in + 100 dpi fonts must be placed in tt/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi//tt. /item item - 75 dpi fonts should be placed in + 75 dpi fonts must be placed in tt/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi//tt. /item
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation of the package with which they are associated the font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. Why should packages that require a particular font package for operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font packages? I ask since AbiWord is exactly one such package. sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/ OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss pgpdC8Z6QHpbs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: I am re-proposing this. The only change is the following two paragraphs: item Fonts of any type supported by the X Window System must be be in a separate binary package from any executables, libraries, or documentation (except that specific to the fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation of the package with which they are associated the font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. footnote This is because the X server may retrieve fonts from the local filesystem or over the network from an X font server; the Debian package system is empowered to deal only with the local filesystem. /footnote /item Seconded, with the proviso that I reserve the right to later be disagreeable about some of the musts... (Later being after we work out a satisfactory way of specifying what must is meant to specify. Julian, I'd really appreciate it if you could propose something along those lines. But not in this thread...) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net) pgpgDgG9YjiFN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote: On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation of the package with which they are associated the font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. Why should packages that require a particular font package for operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font packages? I ask since AbiWord is exactly one such package. Because, as indicated elsewhere in the proposal, the fonts may be served by a font server, and thus need not be installed locally. A Recommends: font-package is probably appropriate. -- - mdz
Re: Bug#91257: re-proposing this
* Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au [010506 00:05]: Seconded, with the proviso that I reserve the right to later be disagreeable about some of the musts... AJ, I don't think anyone would ever expect you to give up being disagreeable about musts. :) Actually, we might be rather disappointed or disillusioned. :) -- Earthlink: The #1 provider of unsolicited bulk email to the Internet.
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote: Why should packages that require a particular font package for operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font packages? Why did you not read the footnote that IMMEDIATELY followed the text you quoted? -- G. Branden Robinson | Yesterday upon the stair, Debian GNU/Linux| I met a man who wasn't there. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | He wasn't there again today, http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | I think he's from the CIA. pgp9kSmyCpKb8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#91257: re-proposing this
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 03:08:54AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:45:28AM -0500, Sam TH wrote: On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 12:46:04AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: fonts shipped, such as their license information). If one or more of the fonts so packaged are necessary for proper operation of the package with which they are associated the font package may be Recommended; if the fonts merely provide an enhancement, a Suggests relationship may be used. Packages must not Depend on font packages. Why should packages that require a particular font package for operation (and indeed normally require that package to be installed on the local system AND the remote system) not depend on their font packages? I ask since AbiWord is exactly one such package. Because, as indicated elsewhere in the proposal, the fonts may be served by a font server, and thus need not be installed locally. A Recommends: font-package is probably appropriate. Like I said, AbiWord requires the fonts to be installed locally. It doesn't work otherwise. sam th --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/ OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss pgp4YicfFJrEU.pgp Description: PGP signature
