[Pkg-fonts-devel] Update for fonts-sil-annapurna

Bobby de Vos bobby_devos at sil.org
Fri Jun 23 23:37:53 UTC 2017

On 2017-06-08 05:04, Fabian Greffrath wrote:

> I just had a look through the packagging that I could find here:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-fonts/fonts-sil-annapurna.git/tree/debian

Thank you for your efforts.

> debian/control:
> - You add versioned Breaks and Replaces against a package that is not in
> Debian. Why is this necessary and what happens for version numbers (>=
> 1.202)? If this is indeed an unversioned Breaks, please turn it into a
> Conflicts relationship instead.

I see you point about fonts-sil-annapurnasil not being a Debian package
and can certainly remove those lines. Those lines were added by Daniel
Glassey (a DD) for making a package for packages.sil.org (PSO) which
hosts Ubuntu packages for users primarily in SIL. On PSO a package
fonts-sil-annapurnasil was created before it was realized that Debian
had fonts-sil-annapurna. In order to transition PSO to using the same
package names as Debian something needed to be done.

Even if I remove these lines, how should I handle the transition on PSO?
I face this issue with more than one font package, and also TECkit,
which is on PSO (one of the package names is libteckit) but Debian has
libteckit0 [1] so I also need to transition the package on PSO.

I thought I was following the package transition guidelines [2] for #5
Rename which says to use Breaks/Replaces. Item #5 links to another page
that discusses Breaks/Replaces. I also read about Conflicts and Breaks
in the policy manual at [3] and thought Breaks was the correct choice.
What did I miss?

Even if I use Breaks/Replaces I am confused by what version number to
use (and what operator such as << or <=). So, on PSO I now have
fonts-sil-annapurnasil and fonts-sil-annapurna, both at version 1.202-1.
The package sil-annapurnasil is a transitional package. Except for
having a transitional package, I don't intend for there to be another,
later version of sil-annapurnasil, I would be happy to have
fonts-sil-annapurna be the renamed replacement of
fonts-sil-annapurnasil. How do I best ensure apt-get dist-upgrade
handles this correctly?

> - Why on earth should a font package suggest a shared library? Please
> remove this line.

The font needs a shaping library such as HarfBuzz or Graphite2 to
display correctly. That is why the shared library of libgraphite2-3 is
listed. How else do I ensure a shaping library in installed, or is that
a default at this point in time? Also, this line was added by Daniel,
and I did not think I had the expertise to override what he had done.

> dirs:
> - This file shouldn't be necessary if you install the fonts by an
> 'install' file, which you do.

This makes sense to me for installing a package. Nicolas Spalinger
wondered if the dirs file was needed to cleanly remove the created
directories when the package was removed.

> docs:
> - So you install the WOFF font files into the documentation directory. And
> while I find that ugly and close to unacceptable, I have to admit that we
> currently don't have any real alternative without triggering fontconfig.
> What I'd like better, though, would be if you could install the files into
> /usr/share/fonts-sil-annapurna/woff (i.e. without "fonts/") and symlink
> the files into the documentation directory. Strictly speaking, they aren't
> documentation itself but merely needed to properly render the docs.

Indeed, I realize WOFF files in the  documentation directory has been an
issue. This package was prepared before we had a good understanding of
the WOFF spec, IIRC. And I thank you for helping to discuss it and file
a bug with fontconfig. Am I understanding you correctly that using the
location /usr/share/fonts-sil-annapurna/woff is better than a fontconfig
override as discussed in this [4] thread?

Thanks, Bobby

[1] https://packages.debian.org/experimental/libteckit0

[2] https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition

[3] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-breaks


Bobby de Vos
/bobby_devos at sil.org/

More information about the Pkg-fonts-devel mailing list