Bug 2122022 - Review Request: ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts - Terminus TTF is a monospace TrueType Font
Summary: Review Request: ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts - Terminus TTF is a monospace TrueTyp...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Akira TAGOH
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-FONTS
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-08-28 14:38 UTC by Benson Muite
Modified: 2024-06-10 01:51 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-06-10 01:27:44 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
tagoh: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Akira TAGOH 2022-10-18 09:40:53 UTC
Before starting the formal review:

1. the foundry is supposed to be set from the foundry property in fontconfig though, "PfEd" is too generic. if upstream doesn't have too much fonts shipped by them, you can simply omit that field. or if "Terminus" is a unique name enough, you can use it instead, like DejaVu.
2. please set correct family name to the family. that should be "Terminus (TTF)". this affects the AppStream file and the wrong name there makes harder to find out the exact font name through AppStream.
3. You don't need "<test name="lang"...><string>en</string>" thing in config.

Comment 2 Benson Muite 2022-10-25 07:09:27 UTC
Thanks for your feedback. Checking with upstream.

Comment 3 Akira TAGOH 2022-10-28 05:00:47 UTC
BTW those are basically Fedora specific thing. I'm not recommending updating the foundry to something. that would be totally optional and there are some exception like "ADBO" vs "Adobe". that depends on how we are identifying. but the proposed name is too long.

Comment 4 Benson Muite 2022-10-28 14:46:17 UTC
Thanks for your feedback.  There are other Terminus fonts. When changing the field in FontConfig, it indicates upto 4 characters should be used.  Thus rather than Tilman Blumenbach, have used TiBl, checking with upstream on this. A few of the glyphs have self intersections and some seem to be incorrectly labelled.  Have not tried to correct these, but can do so if that is typical. Updated spec and srpm:

SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/tilman-blumenbach-terminus-mono-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04995077-tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts/tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts.spec
SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/tilman-blumenbach-terminus-mono-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/04995077-tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts/tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.2-1.fc38.src.rpm

Comment 5 Akira TAGOH 2022-12-21 06:15:25 UTC
No COPYING file in the package.

I'd suggest:
--- tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts.spec.orig        2022-12-21 14:46:50.779287851 +0900
+++ tibl-terminus-ttf-fonts.spec        2022-12-21 15:14:25.781055220 +0900
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
 It should also be noted that you need to render Terminus TTF in monochrome
 black/white if the outlines are used; otherwise, they will look smeary.}
 
-%global fonts  terminus-ttf-%{version}/*.ttf
+%global fonts  *.ttf
 %global fontconfs  %{SOURCE10}
 
 Source0: %{url}/files/%{version}/terminus-ttf-%{version}.zip 
@@ -42,9 +42,7 @@
 %fontpkg
 
 %prep
-%setup -q -c
-unzip -n %{SOURCE0}
-pushd terminus-ttf-%{version}
+%setup -q -n terminus-ttf-%{version}
 # Remove space from filename
 mv 'TerminusTTF-Bold Italic-4.49.2.ttf' TerminusTTF-Bold-Italic-4.49.2.ttf
 # Update foundry name
@@ -54,7 +52,6 @@
 fontforge -script UpdateFoundry.pe TerminusTTF-Italic-4.49.2.ttf
 fontforge -script UpdateFoundry.pe TerminusTTF-Bold-4.49.2.ttf
 rm UpdateFoundry.pe
-popd
 
 %build
 %fontbuild

Comment 6 Benson Muite 2022-12-22 08:36:26 UTC
Thanks. Checking with upstream on naming and registration as a foundry.

Comment 8 Akira TAGOH 2023-01-13 12:21:13 UTC
BTW just waiting for the progress on upstream though, I want to bring this up to be sure.

Registering the own foundry name isn't a must. we are considering to pick it up into the package name because it would be easier to recognize if a font is a part of variants/series of fonts made by same font developers/authors - for example, we use the same the foundry prefix in a package name as "google" for google-noto-fonts and google-noto-cjk-fonts.

The question is that do we have another variants/typefaces made by same authors, particularly which can be used together such as sans-serif, serif, and monospace, and/or regional typefaces, etc? if this is a single font or other fonts isn't that useful to use together, we can simply omit the foundry from the package name IMHO. the family name is basically unique. it wouldn't conflicts anything else.

Anyway, I can do the formal review any time.

Comment 10 Akira TAGOH 2024-05-14 09:31:03 UTC
Sorry for taking a long time and not getting back to you eariler. Here is the review result:

As a summary, %{SOURCE10} must be renamed to 60-%{fontpkgname}.conf not .xml. this file is installed on the system as it is though, fontconfig can't read it. otherwise it looks good to me.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "SIL Open Font License 1.1", "SIL Open Font License 1.0".
     Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /var/home/tagoh/2122022-ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /etc/fonts, /usr/share/fontconfig, /usr/share,
     /usr/share/fonts, /usr/share/licenses, /usr/share/metainfo,
     /etc/fonts/conf.d, /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail, /usr, /etc
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/fonts,
     /usr/share/fontconfig, /usr/share, /usr/share/fonts,
     /usr/share/licenses, /usr/share/metainfo, /etc/fonts/conf.d,
     /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail, /usr, /etc
[-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
     license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
     license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: manually verified.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

fonts:
[x]: Run fc-query on all fonts in package.
     Note: manually checked
[?]: Run repo-font-audit on all fonts in package.
     Note: Cannot find repo-font-audit, install fontpackages-tools package
     to make a comprehensive font review.
     See: url: undefined


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc41.noarch.rpm
          ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc41.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp4u617cen')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: E: spelling-error ('monospace', 'Summary(en_US) monospace -> mono space, mono-space, aerospace')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: E: spelling-error ('px', '%description -l en_US px -> PX, ox, p')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.src: E: spelling-error ('monospace', 'Summary(en_US) monospace -> mono space, mono-space, aerospace')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.src: E: spelling-error ('px', '%description -l en_US px -> PX, ox, p')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: W: no-documentation
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings, 9 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.3 s 


Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 1

ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: E: spelling-error ('monospace', 'Summary(en_US) monospace -> mono space, mono-space, aerospace')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: E: spelling-error ('px', '%description -l en_US px -> PX, ox, p')
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.noarch: W: no-documentation
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 4 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.ax86.net/terminus-ttf/files/4.49.3/terminus-ttf-4.49.3.zip :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 0ead921d98d99a4590ffe6cd66dc037fc0a2ceea1c735d866ba73fe058257577
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0ead921d98d99a4590ffe6cd66dc037fc0a2ceea1c735d866ba73fe058257577


Requires
--------
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    config(ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts)
    fontpackages-filesystem



Provides
--------
ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts:
    ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts
    config(ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts)
    font(terminus(ttf))
    metainfo()
    metainfo(org.fedoraproject.ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts.metainfo.xml)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2122022
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: fonts, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: R, Ocaml, Java, SugarActivity, PHP, Perl, Haskell, C/C++, Python
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 12 Fedora Review Service 2024-05-21 15:28:04 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7471255
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2122022-ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07471255-ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 13 Akira TAGOH 2024-05-27 07:52:20 UTC
Thank you for updating. APPROVED then.

Comment 14 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2024-06-01 10:38:16 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts

Comment 15 Benson Muite 2024-06-01 11:15:09 UTC
Thanks for the review.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2024-06-01 13:50:25 UTC
FEDORA-2024-571169e784 (ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-571169e784

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2024-06-01 14:00:49 UTC
FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655 (ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2024-06-02 02:18:31 UTC
FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2024-06-02 02:50:28 UTC
FEDORA-2024-571169e784 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-571169e784 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-571169e784

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2024-06-10 01:27:44 UTC
FEDORA-2024-571169e784 (ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2024-06-10 01:51:51 UTC
FEDORA-2024-ad63fee655 (ax86-terminus-ttf-fonts-4.49.3-1.fc39) has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.