fonts March 2011

fonts@lists.fedoraproject.org

14 participants
8 discussions

font packages list
by Akira TAGOH 29 Aug '11

29 Aug '11

Hi, just thought it may be a good idea to put the packages list anywhere, which fonts are used for aliases by default. so I'm trying to generate the list from comps and the fontconfig file (to see the priority and the alias) in a package. Here is the list genereated: https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/f14-defaultinstalledfonts.html That doesn't contain all of font packages but only font packages marked as "mandatory" or "default" in comps. also sorted out against the fontconfig priority. Also the source code is available at: http://fedorapeople.org/gitweb?p=tagoh/public_git/fonts-sig.git;a=tree;f=fo… I'm not checking everything so it might be wrong in some cases. any volunteers to check are always welcome :) Cheers, -- Akira TAGOH

3 10

Re: Partially hinted fonts
by Masahiro Sekiguchi 05 Apr '11

05 Apr '11

> I have noticed that several of the non-Latin fonts we ship in Fedora contain > partial hinting information, usually not covering (or covering only very > poorly) the intended target alphabet(s) of the fonts. It is a common practice in so-called CJK regions. > This is a problem because the version of Freetype in Fedora 15 will see that > there is some hinting bytecode and try to use the bytecode interpreter > rather than the autohinter on the entire font. If the relevant characters > are then not actually hinted, those characters will be entirely unhinted, > looking blurry. Hmm. I didn't noticed it. It is really a big problem. With very few exceptions, almost all CJK fonts are *partically* hinted. (I'm not familiar with fonts for other scripts, but I guess there are some more with similar situations.) That means most of the CJK fonts will not work well in Fedora. > According to Freetype upstream, you should remove all hinting bytecode from > the fonts if it's not complete. > Please go through your fonts, especially non-Latin fonts, looking for > hinting bytecode, and if it isn't anywhere near complete, please remove it > from the font. It may be acceptable for a short term workaround, but I don't think it is an appropriate solution. We could remove those partial hints from all the Fedora distributed fonts, but we have no control over other fonts; there are many free or commercial CJK fonts other than those packaged in Fedora, that are partially hinted. If we go you-should- remove-all-partial-hints-if-you-want-to- use-it-on-Fedora direction, Fedora users will be effectively unable to use those fonts, that IMHO is not a good idea. What happens if I propose Fedora to simply exclude those bytecode support in Fedora distribution of FreeType, as in the past?

7 7

Please add Nanum fonts for Korean Users.
by sangu 31 Mar '11

31 Mar '11

Nanum Gothic\Myeonjo\Brush\Pen http://cdn.naver.com/naver/NanumFont/fontfiles/NanumFont_TTF_ALL.zip http://cdn.naver.com/naver/NanumFont/fontfiles/NanumFont_OTF_ALL.zip NaumGohicCoding http://dev.naver.com/projects/nanumfont/download/441?filename=NanumGothicCo… License : SIL OPEN FONT LICENSE ( http://help.naver.com/ops/step2/faq.nhn?faqId=15879 )

2 2

Partially hinted fonts
by Kevin Kofler 31 Mar '11

31 Mar '11

Hi, I have noticed that several of the non-Latin fonts we ship in Fedora contain partial hinting information, usually not covering (or covering only very poorly) the intended target alphabet(s) of the fonts. In particular, several of our CJK fonts include hinting information only for Latin characters, or otherwise covering few to no CJK ideographs. This is a problem because the version of Freetype in Fedora 15 will see that there is some hinting bytecode and try to use the bytecode interpreter rather than the autohinter on the entire font. If the relevant characters are then not actually hinted, those characters will be entirely unhinted, looking blurry. According to Freetype upstream, you should remove all hinting bytecode from the fonts if it's not complete. If Freetype sees that there's no hinting bytecode, it will now automatically fallback to the autohinter. (I got that fixed, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547532 .) But the patch doesn't help for partially hinted fonts, and Freetype upstream told me they don't want to support these anyway (see https://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/index.php?7471#comment9 – they say that "auto-hinting single glyphs won't give satisfying results since the glyphs won't blend with other, natively hinted ones"). See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=682667 for how this affects the Indic Lohit fonts, which are now being fixed by removing the offending hinting bytecode. Please go through your fonts, especially non-Latin fonts, looking for hinting bytecode, and if it isn't anywhere near complete, please remove it from the font. (If your font is a CJK font, the hinting bytecode is very unlikely to be anywhere near complete.) This will make your font look much better in Fedora 15 and higher (and Fedora 13/14 with freetype-freeworld, which was always built with the bytecode interpreter enabled and now also includes the auto-autohint magic, as of freetype-freeworld-2.4.2-5.fc14 and freetype-freeworld-2.3.11-6.fc13). Thank you for your cooperation, Kevin Kofler

2 1

missing the fonts of CID Speedo etc.
by feigle.dou 30 Mar '11

30 Mar '11

Greeting all, I am using the FC 14 32bit, after the installation, I tried to use installed VNC-server, but when starting VNC there are wrong massage: ---------snip------------------------- vncext: VNC extension running! vncext: Listening for VNC connections on port 5902 vncext: created VNC server for screen 0 error opening security policy file /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xserver/SecurityPolicy Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/, removing from list! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/, removing from list! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/, removing from list! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/CID/, removing from list! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/, removing from list! Could not init font path element /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/, removing from list! ----------snip end------------------ After struggling for a long time, i got other font worked. but i can not find or install CID fonts. And, I know that RedHat get the vnc server installed automaticlly, can FC 14 do it also. Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks, feigle 2011-03-30 feigle.dou

1 0

Re: fontforge in f15
by Nicolas Mailhot 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

Le Dim 20 mars 2011 17:50, Kevin Fenzi a écrit : > Greetings. > > Currently we are shipping fontforge-20100501 in f15. > > fontforge-20110222 is available (and in rawhide). > > What would folks think about updating f15? > It's a bugfix release, so I wouldn't expect any big issues, but I thought I would check with everyone before doing so. > > http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/changelog.html#change-log > has a list of changes. That would be nice but I'd really like the existing font packages to be rebuilt against this version to make sure there is no regression and someone who tries to rebuild a fedora font package with the fedora fontconfig gets the same results as us. And that needs someone to notify package owners, give them the time to rebuild their packages if they want to, rebuild in their stead otherwise. BTW : it's really nice to see all the fontconfig bugs squashed upstream those past months because Fedora people reported them (sometimes with patches), keep up the good work! -- Nicolas Mailhot

4 6

fontforge in f15
by Kevin Fenzi 21 Mar '11

21 Mar '11

Greetings. Currently we are shipping fontforge-20100501 in f15. fontforge-20110222 is available (and in rawhide). What would folks think about updating f15? It's a bugfix release, so I wouldn't expect any big issues, but I thought I would check with everyone before doing so. http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/changelog.html#change-log has a list of changes. Thoughts? kevin

5 4

Fixing glob2
by Bruno Wolff III 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

glob2 includes a single ttf file that I can probably replace with a symlink to dejavu sans. Based on a an upstream discussion about an aborted switch to a nonfree font, I suspect the font is free, but is there some way to check? The font name in the source is just sans.ttf which isn't very revealing. I haven't stumbled across documentation on where the font came from yet. Is there a tool that can report the source from the ttf file? If I can't find the source of the font, should I strip it from the source tarball?

3 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts March 2011