Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#4625 - Most font install scripts are incorrect
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Francois Charette (Firmicus) - Saturday, 13 May 2006, 00:17 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Tuesday, 16 May 2006, 21:02 GMT
Opened by Francois Charette (Firmicus) - Saturday, 13 May 2006, 00:17 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Tuesday, 16 May 2006, 21:02 GMT
|
DetailsIn http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/4117 "Romashka" judiciously raises the point that install scripts for fonts completely lack standardization.
Actually it turns out that most of them are incorrect, or could be significantly improved. 1) The functions fc-cache, mkfontscale and mkfontdir should always be given with arguments, namely the actual dirs where the packaged fonts were installed. Otherwise fc-cache will update all the caches of all font dirs on the system, even in user directories, which can be unnecessarily slow. 2) mkfontscale should always be called BEFORE mkfontdir, because the latter relies on the output of mkfontscale. Thus when one uninstalls a font package with an (un)install script in which the order is reversed, the removed fonts remain listed in the file fonts.dir, and applications will continue to behave as though they were still available. As far as I could identify them, the packages where one or both of the above problems occur are: terminus-font ttf-bitstream-vera ttf-arphic-ukai ttf-arphic-uming ttf-cheapskate ttf-fireflysung ttf-freebanglafont ttf-indic-otf ttf-isabella ttf-junicode ttf-khmer ttf-mph-2b-damase ttf-thai ttf-ubraille ttf-dejavu (AUR/unsupported was not considered of course) On the other hand the following six packages are fine and can be used as models to fix the incriminated ones: font-bh-ttf, gsfonts, xorg-fonts-100dpi, xorg-fonts-75dpi, xorg-fonts-misc, and xorg-fonts-type1. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Jan de Groot (JGC)
Saturday, 02 September 2006, 19:21 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: Looks like all fonts have been done for now.
Saturday, 02 September 2006, 19:21 GMT
Reason for closing: Fixed
Additional comments about closing: Looks like all fonts have been done for now.
The ones that left are:
ttf-fireflysung
ttf-arphic-uming
ttf-arphic-ukai
ttf-ms-fonts
ttf-freebanglafont
ttf-khmer
From Community:
ttf-dejavu is not fixed completely
ttf-freefont needs to be fixed too
BTW why some fonts depends on xorg-fonts-alias but others don't? And the same for xorg-fonts-encodings.
Could you please move it to Extra, JGC?
terminus-font is still not fixed too. There are also other not so popular fonts in AUR that have bad post-install procedure.
I don't have plans for other font packages that aren't in the current/extra/unstable repository at this moment.
As for ttf-freefont - IMHO it _should_ be in Extra because it is one of the most complete free Unicode fonts (many distros include it in base desktop installations).
So, what about xorg-fonts-alias and xorg-fonts-encodings? Are they needed for all font packages?