Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1021757
Summary: | Use fc-cache /usr/share/fonts/<your font directory> instead of /usr/share/fonts | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Akira TAGOH <tagoh> | |
Component: | ghostscript-fonts | Assignee: | Tim Waugh <twaugh> | |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | unspecified | |||
Version: | 19 | CC: | fonts-bugs, patrick, twaugh | |
Target Milestone: | --- | |||
Target Release: | --- | |||
Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
OS: | Unspecified | |||
Whiteboard: | ||||
Fixed In Version: | ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 1023977 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-11-08 04:40:04 UTC | Type: | Bug | |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | ||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | ||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | ||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | ||
Embargoed: | ||||
Bug Depends On: | ||||
Bug Blocks: | 1023977 |
Description
Akira TAGOH
2013-10-22 02:25:37 UTC
For the postuninstall scriptlet too? Is there anything planned for the Fedora Project packaging guidelines to make sure there are no regressions with this? Does this change look correct?: diff --git a/ghostscript-fonts.spec b/ghostscript-fonts.spec index d66fbaa..c2cbc3f 100644 --- a/ghostscript-fonts.spec +++ b/ghostscript-fonts.spec @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ Summary: Fonts for the Ghostscript PostScript interpreter Name: ghostscript-fonts Version: 5.50 -Release: 30%{?dist} +Release: 31%{?dist} # Contacted Kevin Hartig, who agreed to relicense his fonts under the SIL Open Font # License. Hershey fonts are under the "Hershey Font License", which is not what Fontmap # says (Fontmap is wrong). @@ -58,13 +58,13 @@ ln -sf %{fontdir} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{catalogue}/default-ghostscript { mkfontscale %{fontdir} mkfontdir %{fontdir} - fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts + fc-cache %{fontdir} } &> /dev/null || : %postun { if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then - fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts + fc-cache %{fontdir} fi } &> /dev/null || : @@ -80,6 +80,10 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %ghost %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{fontdir}/fonts.scale %changelog +* Tue Oct 22 2013 Tim Waugh <twaugh> - 5.50-31 +- Run fc-cache on our font directory, not the entire font collection + (bug #1021757). + * Wed Feb 13 2013 Fedora Release Engineering <rel-eng.org> - 5.50-30 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_19_Mass_Rebuild (In reply to Tim Waugh from comment #1) > For the postuninstall scriptlet too? > > Is there anything planned for the Fedora Project packaging guidelines to > make sure there are no regressions with this? Well, what the packaging guidelines actually say is that you shouldn't install any font without using fontpackages-devel templates and macros or splitting fonts per family, which means all font packages have the same implementation and there is no risk of single-package regression. I appreciate that ghostscript antedates the consolidation work that went into current font packaging guidelines, but maybe it's time to align it with them? Also TEX people have spent many years cleaning up and modernizing gs fonts. It would be worthwhile to package the tex gyre family and use them as replacement, dropping all legacy font formats and core font calls. I *think* tex gyre licensing is finally clean and safe (but you'd need to check with spot) That's a fair point. :-) That work might have to be done in step with urw-fonts. ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc19 ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20 Package ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-19682/ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20 then log in and leave karma (feedback). ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. ghostscript-fonts-5.50-32.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |