Quoting Fabian Greffrath (2019-02-09 12:38:55) > Some other fonts don't even allow to get grouped like this, for > example the fonts-cantarell package. It's in the list, because some > GTK3 applications only render a proper UI if this font is installed > without explicitly depending on it. This is pretty much its own > category, so should we introduce another meta-package just to pull > this one in? gnome-core and mate-desktop-environment-core depend on fonts-cantarell. Any packages needing this font for proper rendering should recommend it, in my opinion. > Or fonts-urw-base35, which contains replicas of the 35 Postscript Core > fonts, which are expected to be available on about any desktop > operating system since the 1990s (at least if you are going to render > PS or PDF files). Which category is this, which meta-package should we > put this in. Ghostscript recommends gsfonts. Scribus and xpdf recommends gsfonts-x11. If evince and other Postscript renderers do not recommend some package covering the base35 fonts, then that is a bug in Evince, not an argument for including it in a metapackage. In my opinion - feel free to disagree and no need to defend your opinion, you clearly made a move already and feel strongly about it, so good luck! libgs9 does not need gsfonts - it is up to its consumers to decide which fonts they each need. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature