Re: a "fonts-recommended" metapackage?
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> ...and my previous remark quoted above was pulled from vague memory,
> when I noticed the oddity of Ghostscript not depending on any of them.
> How embarrasing! Thanks for pointing it out!
I just found this, so apparently we discussed this issue before some 8
years ago:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=613912
Most of the discussion still holds true. Now add to this equation the fact
that fonts-urw-base35 is a separate project now with its own proper
releases.
- Fabian
Reply to: