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 484514 - fonts in gs
Summary: fonts in gs
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: ghostscript
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Tim Waugh
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: F11Target
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-02-07 17:36 UTC by acount closed by user
Modified: 2009-02-24 12:14 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-02-24 12:14:52 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description acount closed by user 2009-02-07 17:36:57 UTC 
don't delete Font dir on the spec file:

# Don't ship URW fonts; we already have them.
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/ghostscript/%{gs_dot_ver}/Resource/Font

because urw-fonts-2.4-6 are older(and with bugs) than the fonts included in gs.

or get it a new urw-fonts code from http://svn.ghostscript.com/ghostscript/trunk/urw-fonts/ . There is no more ftp://ftp.gnome.ru/fonts/sources

-thanks-
Comment 1 acount closed by user 2009-02-07 17:54:45 UTC 
also the ghostscript-fonts package must be deleted, because they are the _same_ fonts than urw-fonts. It's a pure "GNU" package when gs was not free!
Comment 2 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-02-17 18:12:13 UTC 
And anyway they both need to get fixed for F11 font infra changes or they won't be functional for F11 users

bug #477389
bug #477477

Behdad's and Hughsie's stuff assumes sane packages have been converted by release tiume by their maintainers.
Comment 3 Tim Waugh 2009-02-23 17:57:24 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> also the ghostscript-fonts package must be deleted, because they are the _same_
> fonts than urw-fonts. It's a pure "GNU" package when gs was not free!

I don't think this is true actually.  There are fonts shipped in ghostscript-fonts that are not shipped in urw-fonts or ghostscript, such as Hershey and Calligraphic-Katakana/Hiragana.
Comment 4 Than Ngo 2009-02-24 12:00:05 UTC 
># Don't ship URW fonts; we already have them.
>rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/ghostscript/%{gs_dot_ver}/Resource/Font
>
>because urw-fonts-2.4-6 are older(and with bugs) than the fonts included in >gs.
>

i don't think the urw-fonts-2.4-6 are older. The gs fonts in trunk are still based on 1.0.7pre43. The urw-fonts-2.4-6 are based on 1.0.7pre44 and it includes several fixes.

It's correct that ghostscript removes the fonts included in gs

>or get it a new urw-fonts code from
>http://svn.ghostscript.com/ghostscript/trunk/urw-fonts/ . There is no more
>ftp://ftp.gnome.ru/fonts/sources

it's correct that the url ftp://ftp.gnome.ru/fonts/sources is not reachable, i tried to contact Valek but still didn't get any respone yet.


> also the ghostscript-fonts package must be deleted, because they are the >_same_fonts than urw-fonts. It's a pure "GNU" package when gs was not free!

no, it's not the same fonts what are in urw-fonts shipped.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.