Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Please move vera-specific fontconfig setup to the vera package|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot>|
|Component:||bitstream-vera-fonts||Assignee:||Behdad Esfahbod <behdad>|
|Status:||CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA||QA Contact:|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-05-06 21:43:42 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Nicolas Mailhot 2007-05-12 06:12:10 EDT
the main fontconfig package is shipping vera-specific config info (in separate files even) It should be moved to the vera package so it's not processed by the system when vera is not installed
Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2007-05-14 00:57:13 EDT
At the cost of adding a fontconfig dependency to bitstream-vera-fonts.
Comment 2 Nicolas Mailhot 2007-05-14 04:08:41 EDT
No, there's no harm installing vera-related setup info even if fontconfig is not installed. If fontconfig is installed it will be interpreted if not, not problem. The big change is fontconfig won't have to deal with vera setup if the truetype files are not on-system
Comment 3 Behdad Esfahbod 2007-05-14 07:55:19 EDT
The dependency is required since fontconfig owns /etc/fonts
Comment 4 Nicolas Mailhot 2007-05-14 08:22:05 EDT
Yes, directory ownership is a mess. Some people want every directory owned. Others absolutely loathe multiple ownership. IIRC the consensus was to move directories like /etc/fonts to a filesystem package, so they are owned by a single something but do not bring in optional code (The only caveats was you needed several directory users to make a case for filesystem, but right now we have the problem for every font package that ships fontconfig rules and our font guidelines sort-of imply /etc/fonts is used without a owner if it's not moved to filesystem)
Comment 5 Nicolas Mailhot 2007-05-14 08:22:43 EDT
Do you want a separate bug to move /etc/fonts from fontconfig to filesystem?
Comment 6 Matthias Clasen 2007-05-14 10:09:18 EDT
You could just pile onto bug 239246 which I filed earlier for similar cases.
Comment 7 Nicolas Mailhot 2007-05-14 11:03:57 EDT
(In reply to comment #6) > You could just pile onto bug 239246 which I filed earlier for similar cases. Ok, done. Thanks
Comment 8 Behdad Esfahbod 2007-10-25 20:45:32 EDT
I don't see any Vera stuff left in our fontconfig package. The rest of font-specific stuff has another bug filed for them already.
Comment 9 Nicolas Mailhot 2007-10-26 04:13:57 EDT
You have the unhint vera at small sizes rules that should be moved in vera package
Comment 10 Bug Zapper 2008-04-03 20:39:31 EDT
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
Comment 11 Bug Zapper 2008-05-06 21:43:40 EDT
This bug has been in NEEDINFO for more than 30 days since feedback was first requested. As a result we are closing it. If you can reproduce this bug in the future against a maintained Fedora version please feel free to reopen it against that version. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp