FS#8951 - ttf-arphic-ukai, ttf-arphic-uming seems duplicate with ttf-fireflysung
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Daniel YC Lin (dlin) - Monday, 17 December 2007, 05:49 GMT
Last edited by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Saturday, 21 March 2009, 22:09 GMT
Opened by Daniel YC Lin (dlin) - Monday, 17 December 2007, 05:49 GMT
Last edited by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Saturday, 21 March 2009, 22:09 GMT
|
Details
Description: ttf-arphic-ukai, ttf-arphic-uming seems
duplicate with ttf-fireflysung
I suggess to remove the ttf-archic-*, because the firefly's version keep maintained. By the way, could change the ttf-fireflysung 's descrition to "firefly embedded (truetype) bitmap font (Chinese)" Additional info: * package version(s) * config and/or log files etc. Steps to reproduce: |
This task depends upon
Closed by Eric Belanger (Snowman)
Saturday, 21 March 2009, 22:09 GMT
Reason for closing: Not a bug
Additional comments about closing: see my comments.
Saturday, 21 March 2009, 22:09 GMT
Reason for closing: Not a bug
Additional comments about closing: see my comments.
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) -
Wednesday, 25 February 2009, 16:29 GMT
Comment by
Aaron Griffin (phrakture) -
Wednesday, 25 February 2009, 17:01 GMT
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) -
Wednesday, 25 February 2009, 18:25 GMT
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) -
Saturday, 28 February 2009, 04:07 GMT
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) -
Monday, 16 March 2009, 19:55 GMT
Both ttf-arphic-ukai and ttf-arphic-uming are out-of-date. Should
I update them or just remove them? All three packages have similar
usage stats. I'm not confortable in removing them without being
sure if ttf-fireflysung is a correct replacement. Perhaps they
will be better than ttf-fireflysung once they're updated. It seems
that Debian is using arphic instead of fireflysung.
Hmmm - that's a tough one. I wish we could get more people that
use these fonts to comment
It seems that Debian/Ubuntu are developping arphic, at least they
host the source. We could just keep them and update them, that
might be the simplest solution. On a related note, the
scim-related packages are also out-of-date. I could update
everything (scim and arphic) and push it to testing then ask
around for testers.
I've put updated ttf-arphic-ukai and ttf-arphic-uming in testing.
It seems that they now include the firefly fonts so
ttf-fireflysung might be no longer needed. See
http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2009-February/003805.html
for more details.
ttf-arphic-ukai and ttf-arphic-uming are now in extra. As no-one
using these fonts confirmed that ttf-fireflysung is in fact no
longer needed, I suggest keeping all three of them and closing
this bug report. BTW, ttf-fireflysung is in the list of packages
with missing license so it will be updated/fixed as appropriate.
After then, it should be good for a while as I don't think there's
much developpement going on with it. It won't hurt keeping
ttf-fireflysung in the repo as all these fonts are orphans anyway.