Quoting Paul Wise (pabs@debian.org): > Hi all, > > I just had to do an upload of mokomaze because it hardcodes the path to > the Liberation Mono font and the location of that changed between > ttf-liberation and fonts-liberation. Please check reverse dependencies > before moving files around, file bugs asking to switch to the new > package and font name and add compatibility symlinks to the dummy > package name so that programs depending on it still work. OK, so I added these compatibility symlinksin SVN. Please check if that was the Right Way to do things, that will be appreciated. So, we might then need to do a MBF for packages reverse depending on ttf-liberation: - to depends on fonts-liberation instead - to check whether they are using hardcoded paths for fonts Here is the list of those rdepends: lightspark-common freedink-engine ttf-mscorefonts-installer wine-unstable wine |user-he task-hungarian-desktop spotweb sisu-pdf |php-imlib osgearth libopenwalnut1 moovida-plugins-bad liquidsoap-plugin-sdl liquidsoap-plugin-gd lightspark-common |libreoffice |libphp-jpgraph |jclic graphviz gosa goby gnuplot-nox |gnumeric gcstar gargoyle-free |freevo freedink-engine fonts-liberation fonts-liberation education-desktop-other calibre abiword python-aafigure (what are the pipe signs meaning? Any any how to get such list with only the names of packages and not their description?) I propose the following text for the MBF announcement in d-d: Hello, The font packaging team is in the process of renaming many font packages maintained by the team from ttf-<foo> (or similar names) to fonts-<foo>. This is part of the "yet to be published" Font Packaging Policy we're currently polishing. This will bring font packages naming inline with the naming used in other distros (Fedora for instance uses [foundryname-]projectname[-fontfamilyname]-fonts. We chose to prefix the packages names with fonts- instead as it makes packages listing easier to understand). During this process all Debian font packages provide transition packages to allow this name transition to be handled smoothly. We also use this opportunity to move TrueType or OpenType font files in a place where the "ttf-" or "otf-" prefixes aren't used. For instance, fonts-liberation now provides Liberation fonts in /usr/share/fonts/truetype/liberation instead of /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-liberation. However, we recently discovered (with ttf-liberation/fonts-liberation) that some packages depend on a font package because they use *hardcoded* paths to access fonts. This is particularly true with Liberation fonts. This has been solved by providing compatibility links in the transition package but we would like to go one step further and then do a mass bug filing for such packages: - change their dependencies for fonts-liberation instead of ttf-liberation - change the hardcoded paths to either other hardcoded paths or use fontconfig to find fonts without hardcoding paths As a consequence, I plan sending an MBF against packages that reverse depend on ttf-liberation, with the following text: ================================================================ Hello dear maintainer, Your package currently depends on the ttf-liberation package. This package has been renamed to fonts-liberation as part of an effort for consistent naming of font packages. A transition ttf-liberation package is provided for smooth upgrades. We would however like you to change the dependency of your package to fonts-liberation so that we can in the future drop the transition package. IMPORTANT: please note that the fonts location also changed from /usr/share/fonts/truetype/ttf-liberation to /usr/share/fonts/truetype/liberation. If your package hardcodes font paths, you may need to update it to use the new paths (the transition package is currently providing compatibility symlinks). Many thanks in advance for you help in this transition. ================================================================ This action will take place for all font packages that have reverse dependencies. fonts-liberation is currentlyused as an example for these actions. Packages: <list of packages> <dd_list of packages>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature