[Bug 481068] bitmap-fonts needs updating to revised packaging guidelines

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481068 --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2009-09-22 02:38:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) 3.

[Bug 501424] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC1 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501424 --- Comment #7 from sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com 2009-09-23 01:33:15 EDT --- From Comment #6, Correct behaviour

[Bug 501422] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC2 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501422 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 501422] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC2 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501422 Bug 501422 depends on bug 524457, which changed state. Bug 524457 Summary: [ta_IN] Anchor Point class for 0BC1 and OBC2

[Bug 501424] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC1 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501424 Bug 501424 depends on bug 524457, which changed state. Bug 524457 Summary: [ta_IN] Anchor Point class for 0BC1 and OBC2

[Bug 524457] [ta_IN] Anchor Point class for 0BC1 and OBC2 should not be abvm

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524457 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 524457] [ta_IN] Anchor Point class for 0BC1 and OBC2 should not be abvm

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524457 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 501424] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC1 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501424 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 524457] [ta_IN] Anchor Point class for 0BC1 and OBC2 should not be abvm

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=524457 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug 501422] [ta_IN][GPOS] U+0BB[8-9] U+0BC2 have error results.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501422 sandeep shedmake sshed...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] Re: can Libertine fonts be embedded in non-gpl application?

On 09/19/2009 02:14 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: On 09/19/2009 08:17 PM, Brandon Casey wrote: I am interested in embedding the Libertine font within an application at work, so that this application can produce documents using the Libertine font. The target systems will not have the Libertine