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Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!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#55844 - [gsfonts] bad packaging of gsfonts, related to high priority 69 value for fontconfig

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by patrick (potomac) - Monday, 02 October 2017, 18:12 GMT
Last edited by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Friday, 08 December 2017, 19:45 GMT
Task Type General Gripe
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Gaetan Bisson (vesath)
Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No


Hello I discover a problem in the archlinux gsfonts package ( version 20170829-1 ), which doesn't exist in the upstream original version,
which gives a bad rendering fonts in web browsers and applications, especially for the font NimbusSans-regular,

downgrading gsfonts to the previous version ( 20170727-1 ) solves the problem, NimbusSans-regular font is correctly displayed,

after further investigations ( and with the help of the author of gsfonts ) we discover that the problem comes from an archlinux commit :

the author explains clearly the problem here in this bugreport :

Additional info:
* package version(s) gsfonts-20170829-1
* config and/or log files etc.

Steps to reproduce:
- install gsfonts-20170829-1
- open the test html file provided as attache file with this bugreport
- you will notice that the "1" in the string "2017" is not correctly rendered
- downgrade gsfonts to the version 20170727-1
- reopen the html test file, you will see a much better display of the string "2017" for the font nimbusSans regular

a workaround would be to cancel the archlinux commit related to the value "69" :
This task depends upon

Closed by  Gaetan Bisson (vesath)
Friday, 08 December 2017, 19:45 GMT
Reason for closing:  Upstream
Comment by patrick (potomac) - Tuesday, 03 October 2017, 16:29 GMT Comment by Gaetan Bisson (vesath) - Friday, 08 December 2017, 19:45 GMT
Thanks patrick for the link; I guess we're just going to have to wait for a new release. Cheers.