http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188
Karel Volný <kvolny(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |kvolny(a)redhat.com
Platform|x86_64 |All
--- Comment #9 from Karel Volný <kvolny(a)redhat.com> 2010-03-02 11:03:59 ---
I've just needed the "Comic Sans" font yesterday (don't beat me -
http://www.bancomicsans.com/ - our house administration insists on using it for
nameplates)
having a package instead of trying to find which .spec actually works with
recent Fedora would be very nice
could we resolve this bug please?
I'd suggest two approaches:
1) as comment #2 says, we are allowed to redistribute the original files
(
http://corefonts.sourceforge.net/eula.htm)
the Grant of Reproduction and Distribution, how do I understand it, even allows
us to include the files within srpm - since verbatim copies of the .exes can be
extracted from the srpm *and* the srpm can include that EULA (well, it has to
be included in that case)
so, if possible from the POV of the build and distribution system, we can make
an exception and provide just the srpm and not the "binary" packages
2) we can cheat rpm - based on the premise that verbatim copies including the
EULA can be redistributed, we can build binary rpms that would include the
source .exes, and they would install the font files and remove the sources
using post install script
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.