[Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#668889: marked as done (fonts-cmu: Please provide OpenType font instead of TrueType)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:53:54 +0200
with message-id <1334577234.10119.6.camel@razor>
and subject line Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#668889: Bug#668889: fonts-cmu: Please provide OpenType font instead of TrueType
has caused the Debian Bug report #668889,
regarding fonts-cmu: Please provide OpenType font instead of TrueType
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
668889: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=668889
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: fonts-cmu
Version: 0.7.0-2
Severity: normal
As upstream also provides a cm-unicode-0.7.0-otf.tar.xz package, please use
that for the Debian package instead of the ttf one, as OpenType has somewhat
superior features compared to TrueType.
(Changing this should be rather straightforward, basically replacing occurences
of ttf -> otf and truetype -> opentype in most debian/* files)
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers oneiric-updates
APT policy: (500, 'oneiric-updates'), (500, 'oneiric-security'), (500, 'oneiric-proposed'), (500, 'oneiric')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-19-generic (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_AT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_AT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
tags wontfix
thanks
Am Montag, den 16.04.2012, 09:25 +0200 schrieb Fabian Greffrath:
> Am 15.04.2012 17:21, schrieb Khaled Hosny:
> > Superior in what sense? There is no inherent superiority in either
> > format (the terminology is misleading, though), so unless upstream is
> > deliberately adding features to the OTF files that are not in the TTF
> > ones, there shouldn't be any noticeable difference, looking at upstream
> > web page I see nothing that would suggest that, and given that the fonts
> > are autotraced from bitmaps I doubt the choice of splines type makes
> > much difference.
>
> I agree. OTF files are not "better" per se. They may support more
> features but as long as these features are not implemented in the font
> sources, the OTF files are just as good as the TTF files.
>
> - Fabian
Alright. I was thinking that if future upstream versions added some
OTF-specific features, it would faciliate transition to switch to TTF
already, but maybe that's not going to happen anyway. (And yeah, I'm
personally used to preferring OTF over TTF as I've dealt with some fonts
that did use OTF specific features, e.g. some script fonts like
Lobster.)
So, I'm closing this bug, and tagging it as wontfix.
--- End Message ---
Reply to: