[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: Eliminate old "ttf-" font packages



Hi,

On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 21:41:08 -0400
Boyuan Yang <byang@debian.org> wrote:
> > > ttf-freefarsi (1.0.0~beta1-7)
> > > ttf-georgewilliams (20031023-2)
> > > ttf-isabella (1.202-1)
> > > ttf-jsmath (0.090709+0-3)

 I've done it today :)


> > > ttf-dejavu (2.37-1)
> > > ttf-dejavu-core (2.37-1)
> > > ttf-dejavu-extra (2.37-1)

> That's mainly my part of work. By now I think all reverse dependencies
> and build-dependencies to ttf-dejavu* have been dealt and we should see
> fonts-dejavu/2.37-2 migrate to Testing soon. There are several reverse
> suggest/recommend relationship left and please feel free to report bugs
> and/or make uploads to deal with those leftovers.

 Okay, I'd like to report it.


> > > ttf-ancient-fonts (2.60-1)
> > > ttf-ancient-fonts-symbola (2.60-1)
> 
> Renaming source package will have to go through the NEW queue so I
> suggest this be done sooner rather than later.

 Well, with looking into it, it's bit complicated so it takes longer
 time than I've expected.

  - It's collection of upstream zip files
  - Upstream has changed its license to non-free one, so we cannot
    include newest release as main. Maybe it's okay to provide it as
    fonts-ansicent-script-nonfree and fonts-symbola-nonfree


> > > ttf-aenigma (0.0.20080510.dfsg-2)
> > > ttf-anonymous-pro (1.002-1)
> > > ttf-bitstream-vera (1.10-8)
> > > ttf-denemo (2.2.0-2)
> > > ttf-engadget (1.001-1-2)
> > > ttf-sjfonts (2.0.2-1.1)
> > > ttf-staypuft (0.04-7)
> > > ttf-summersby (1.007-9)
> > > ttf-tagbanwa (1.010)
> > > ttf-unifont (1:12.0.01-3)
> > > ttf-mscorefonts-installer (3.8) [contrib]
> > > ttf-xfree86-nonfree (4.2.1-5) [non-free]
> > > ttf-xfree86-nonfree-syriac (4.2.1-5) [non-free]

> Ditto but some packages are not under the Fonts Team's umbrella (like
> ttf-mscorefonts-installer); this may need some coordination.

 Exactly.


-- 
Regards,

 Hideki Yamane     henrich @ debian.org/iijmio-mail.jp


Reply to: