After more than a month of consultation, feedback and tweaking new font packaging guidelines have been approved by FESCO. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2008-11-18) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Package maintainers must now convert their packages in rawhide to the new templates. The following packages have already been converted in rawhide and can serve as examples if the templates published in the fontpackages-devel package are not clear enough: ❄ andika-fonts ❄ apanov-heuristica-fonts ❄ bitstream-vera-fonts ❄ charis-fonts ❄ dejavu-fonts ❄ ecolier-court-fonts ❄ edrip-fonts ❄ gfs-ambrosia-fonts ❄ gfs-artemisia-fonts ❄ gfs-baskerville-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-bodoni-fonts ❄ gfs-complutum-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-classic-fonts ❄ gfs-didot-fonts ❄ gfs-eustace-fonts ❄ gfs-fleischman-fonts ❄ gfs-garaldus-fonts ❄ gfs-gazis-fonts ❄ gfs-jackson-fonts ❄ gfs-neohellenic-fonts ❄ gfs-nicefore-fonts ❄ gfs-olga-fonts ❄ gfs-porson-fonts ❄ gfs-solomos-fonts ❄ gfs-theokritos-fonts ❄ stix-fonts ❄ yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts FPC and FESCO were not consulted on splitting or renaming packages, nevertheless the new templates make it fare easier to manage subpackages, so you're strongly encouraged to split your packages along font family lines. A mandatory rule about splitting will probably be submitted for approval before the F11 release. Further information on fonts packaging changes will be published on fedora-fonts-bugs-list at redhat.com
built http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=77782
Please use the %_font_pkg macro; its an integral part of the official font packaging guidelines. That will require you to perform the mkfontdir stuff manually and probably put the fonts.scale files in a separate subpackage. Given all the problems we have with core X fonts doing this or even dropping fonts.scale altogether for this package is not necessarily a bad thing
To help packagers manage the transition to the new guidelines, we've published the following FAQ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Shipping_fonts_in_other_packages_(FAQ)
FPC approved those two additional guidelines recently, please take them into account if you need to create or update a fonts package or subpackage: – 2009-01-14: naming http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_naming_%282009-01-13%29 — 2009-01-06: exact splitting rules http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Font_package_splitting_rules_%282008-12-21%29 (packagers that can drop font files and just depend on an existing font package are not impacted)
Please update the publican package to reflect this change.
thanks mclasen: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79589
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79738
Transaction Check Error: file /usr/share/fonts/baekmuk-ttf/fonts.scale from install of baekmuk-ttf-fonts-common-2.2-16.fc11.noarch conflicts with file from package baekmuk-ttf-common-fonts-2.2-13.fc11.noarch Your -common subpackage needs to obsolete baekmuk-ttf-common-fonts < 2.2-17
*** Bug 481279 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
(In reply to comment #10) > Your -common subpackage needs to obsolete baekmuk-ttf-common-fonts < 2.2-17 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=80378 Obsoletes: baekmuk-ttf-common-fonts < 2.2-17
This one seems ok in the few tests I ran, let's close