On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 05:45:30PM +0200, Davide Viti wrote: > Hi > On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:25:00PM +0200, Davide Viti wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 09:32:03PM +0200, Davide Viti wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 02:40:09PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > > > On Monday 09 June 2008, Tom Söderlund wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 11:06 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 6 Jun 2008, Tom Söderlund wrote: > > > > > > > > [0] http://gamma.nic.fi/~t_om/debian/ttf-tmuni/ > > > > > > > > > > > > if there are any major changes in the font that could affect the > > > > > > udeb or cause a significant change in its size, it would be nice to > > > > > > hear about those. > > > > > > > > > > The font file which is the sole content of the udeb package has grown > > > > > a > > > > > bit over threefold from 1355768 bytes to 4511176 bytes. > > > > > > > > Hmmm. That's not nice for the memory usage of the graphical installer. > > > > It would be good to look into that before the new version is uploaded. > > > > > > I've created PDF charts [1] for old and new version just to have a quick > > > way > > > for comparing the two: new version does contain more glyphs indeed. > > > > > > The obvious suggestion would be to introduce a mechanism fo stripping > > > unneeded glyps > > > out of the udeb as we already do for ttf-dejavu [2] and ttf-freefont [3] > > > packages. > > > > > > [1] http://alioth.debian.org/~zinosat-guest/ttf-tmuni/ > > > [2] svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-fonts/packages/ttf-dejavu > > > [3] svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-fonts/packages/ttf-freefont > > > > If you look at the above mentioned PDF charts, you'll notice that TONS of > > new > > glyphs have been added to the "Private Use Area" (old version had only one > > "page" containing > > glyphs, new version has 8 pages) and "Supplementary Private Use Area-A" > > which was not > > covered at all in previous version, and now covers 10 pages. > > > > I'm pretty sure we can reduce this font as to be smaller than it was in > > previous version, but > > we must be careful not to remove needed ranges: I can help with this, but > > need some hints from > > people using the font and knowing what is really needed. > > > > Davide > > > so, > I've finally found some time to look again at this and wrote some notes [1] > while > trying to work on it. Results look promising (back to ~1.3 Mb) and I know we > can > do much better: which other ranges can we safely remove? > > regards, > Davide > > [1] http://www.alioth.debian.org/~zinosat-guest/dwiki/tibetan_machine/
Everyone (including myself) seem to have forgotten about this. I've just filed #518331 with a patch which should fix the size problem regards, Davide
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
