Le Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:45:01 +0200, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo a écrit : > Hello. > > I'm packaging adesklets stuff, and it cames with Vera.ttf font included. > We've got this font in ttf-bitstream-vera package, so I was wondering if is > it ok to duplicate it, since some packages are doing it already. > > At least that's something what I got after `apt-file search Vera.ttf`. > wesnoth-data and epplets are not a case cause they using symlink to the > font from ttf-bitstream-vera and depend on it. > > But widelands-data has its own copy. In addition its copyright file doesn't > mention about different license for this font than for the rest of package. > > I assume that symlink is a good way (tm) for such situations, and that > widelands is buggy, but I'm here to ensure myself and maybe others ;) > > Also maybe writing some script for finding such duplicates would be > reasonable, it could in addition finds conflicting files in other packages, > but that's only idea ;)
It looks like a use case for defoma. You can register font or appplication to defoma which then provide some kinds of fonts to the application (dfontmgr provide a visual view on that). This is used for example by ghostrcipt (the print core) . Maybe fontconfig could be used too (though it is only a font registrar). I don't think a recommand to the wanted font package would hurt. However font should not be in application package. There is no font policy per se but at least the policy have a short notice about font usable by the X system being packaged separately (i don't know to which extend this apply here). Well i really hope i would have definitive guidelines about that, My opinion (i am not even DD) is that this is a good practice : fonts are updated and have bugs. I prefer having people who care about fonts maintaining them. (it would be like having the usefull man pages in unrelated packages ... well some does it too :) Regards Alban -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
