Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!

FS#42391 - [ghostscript/gsfonts] provide split package for ghostscript fonts to replace gsfonts in Extra

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Tom Yan (tom.ty89) - Wednesday, 15 October 2014, 17:02 GMT
Last edited by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Wednesday, 22 October 2014, 02:52 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Andreas Radke (AndyRTR)
Gaetan Bisson (vesath)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No


Ghostscript no longer provides fonts file seperately. gsfonts in repo is even built from some old fedora rpm. Providing a split package of the type 1 fonts when building from upstream Ghostscript should provide a package with much better quality.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Gaetan Bisson (vesath)
Wednesday, 22 October 2014, 02:52 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Additional comments about closing:  gsfonts-20130917-1 in [extra]
Comment by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR) - Wednesday, 15 October 2014, 19:01 GMT
Can you provide PKGBUILD?
Comment by Tom Yan (tom.ty89) - Wednesday, 15 October 2014, 19:37 GMT
Though I have to admit that, ghostscript upstream doesn't provide afm (and pfm) anymore. This makes LibreOffice (and maybe some other applications) couldn't make use of the fonts anymore, but so far it seems to work in GIMP, Inkscape and even Firefox.

Edit: The first PKGBUILD has an unnecessary makedepend line

Edit 2: I just found that they provide something like what's in the gsfonts package here;a=summary . However I'm not sure what are their relationship or how are they maintained respectively yet.
Comment by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Wednesday, 15 October 2014, 20:49 GMT
Thanks a lot for your efforts; I'll look at this when I'm back from my little vacation in a few days, unless of course another dev beats me to it.
Comment by Tom Yan (tom.ty89) - Friday, 17 October 2014, 07:45 GMT
I just talked to the urw fonts maintainer on #ghostscript. Attached is the chat log and i hope that you'll find it useful as a reference for how should the gsfonts package should be maintained (or renamed? :P)

The most complete upstream source is urw-core35-fonts.git on, and probably providing a split package from Resource/Font is not a very complete solution, especially when the current use or position of the gsfonts package in Extra is considered.

What we're going to lose when switch to the git is Cyrillic glyphs, but as per the maintainer said, they are bad and not required by standard.
Comment by Tom Yan (tom.ty89) - Friday, 17 October 2014, 08:33 GMT
Example PKGBUILD, enjoy
   PKGBUILD (0.9 KiB)
Comment by Tom Yan (tom.ty89) - Monday, 20 October 2014, 09:16 GMT
Btw fontconfig would not map the "standard names" (i.e. Helvetica, Courier, etc.) without some modification of the confs it came with. I opened a bug report here and attached the updated confs:
Comment by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Wednesday, 22 October 2014, 02:36 GMT
That sounds good but it feels a little awkward switching to a git repo with no releases and only three commits. I'll update the PKGBUILD to this, but won't change the pkgname for now.