Vasudev Kamath <vasudev@copyninja.info> writes: > Hi all, > > I started working on packaging fonts-roboto from the upstream source > available on github ¹. I've prepared package in our git ². If any one > can have a look at the packaging and provide suggestions it would be > good. > > Now coming to fonts-droid, which has now become RC buggy. I'm planning > to drop it right away. I would report bugs on all its reverse > dependencies. > > reverse-depends from ubuntu-dev-tools shows below result for > fonts-droid. > > Reverse-Recommends > ================== > * gnome-shell-pomodoro-data > * libgs9-common > * task-chinese-s-desktop > * task-chinese-t-desktop > * wesnoth-1.12-data > * wesnoth-1.13-data > > Reverse-Suggests > ================ > * signing-party > > Reverse-Depends > =============== > * blender [amd64 arm64 armel armhf hurd-i386 i386 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 mips mipsel powerpc ppc64el s390x] > * cinnamon-desktop-environment > * josm > * performous > * request-tracker4 > * texlive-fonts-extra > > And there is a reverse build-dependency for kodi as reported by > build-rdeps from devscripts package. I'm attaching dd-list output for > above with this mail. > > I'm considering filing bugs against these packages asking them to > appropriately switch to fonts-noto which derived from Droid fonts and > Open-Sans when its available in Debian. > > Please share your thoughts and suggestions on this. Once we all agree to > drop fonts-droid I will send mail to debian-devel with MBF request. > > !NB: fonts-roboto doesn't build fonts from source at this moment, but > things will be changed once all the required tools are available in > Debian. Any one have any suggestions on this?. If not I will write mail requesting MBF (though there are not a lot of packages), and start filing bugs.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature