http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #2 from David Hlacik <david(a)hlacik.eu&gt; 2009-04-14 19:08:45 --- (In reply to comment #1) Yes, KDE is based on qt , which has its own rendering, and does not depends on cairo as GTK apps. Of course you are used to them for many years, please try the packages and tell me about the difference ... Br, David -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #4 from Gianluca Sforna <giallu(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-04-14 22:27:46 --- (In reply to comment #3) Me too, maybe because they show a different content. Can you please attach a couple of screenshots with the same content before and after installing these packages? -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at&gt; 2009-04-15 09:09:40 --- Oh, and I forgot: your %description is missing a paragraph explaining that: * the package is built with bytecode interpreter and subpixel rendering enabled (see the freetype-freeworld blurb) and * additional subpixel rendering patches from Ubuntu are being applied. -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at&gt; 2009-04-15 10:48:47 --- IMHO this is not acceptable. Fedora is not Ubuntu. Fedora's patches fix actual bugs (e.g. the memcpy patch you dropped from freetype definitely fixes a serious bug). Please readd the Fedora patches. Adding Ubuntu's subpixel rendering patches makes sense, removing the Fedora patches doesn't, and whether adding patches other than subpixel rendering from Ubuntu makes sense or not has to be decides on a case by case basis (but in most cases the patches should go into the Fedora package and/or upstream, not be specific to the RPM Fusion package! E.g. I don't see what sense it makes to carry an armel fix in freetype-lcd/freeworld, we don't even support that architecture in RPM Fusion. If anybody cares, it would be the Fedora ARM team, and they'd want it in the Fedora freetype first of all. And that's just one of the patches you added, similar arguments may apply to others). You most likely have to use the same version used in the Fedora release you're targeting to guarantee 100% binary compatibility (which is necessary because we're not going to rebuild all of Fedora against your patched packages). You may get away with a newer one (though I wouldn't recommend it - try to find a package with a matching version in Ubuntu and apply the patches from there instead), but not an older one. You'll also have to check any patches you apply for binary compatibility issues. (Note that the freetype version already matches Rawhide, but I haven't checked the other libs.) Which patch is fixing that? The enable-full-bytecode-interpreter patch? According to the comment in the header file it patches, it should have no effect at all (when the bytecode interpreter is already enabled): it turns off TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING, for which the header file says: The other patch (freetype-2.1.10-enable-ft2-bci.patch in freetype-freeworld, freetype-bytecode-interpreter.patch in your SRPM) enables TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER, so disabling TT_CONFIG_OPTION_UNPATENTED_HINTING is useless, it already happens automatically. So I don't see how that patch would make any difference. I don't see anything in your freetype-lcd.spec which is 1. related to subpixel rendering in any way and 2. not already in freetype-freeworld. So I think freetype-freeworld should stay as it is (possibly modulo the 99-DejaVu-autohinter-only.conf file for which I still don't know what to do with it, whether we use that or not, we'll always make somebody unhappy). -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #10 from Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at&gt; 2009-04-15 11:07:31 --- Your fontconfig has 2 relevant patches: (There's also the 05_lcdfilterlegacy.patch, but all that does is accept lcdfilterlegacy as an alias for lcdlegacy in the config files, I don't see why we need or want that at all.) Both those patches just add fontconfig .conf files. Those files could be added to freetype-freeworld instead, or maybe even to the Fedora fontconfig (I think the options will be ignored if subpixel rendering is disabled), in any case it makes no sense to ship a fontconfig-freeworld package for those (especially not one which overrides the library, as these changes are only to the config file). So to sum up your review requests: * freetype-lcd: not needed, all relevant patches are in freetype-freeworld * cairo-lcd, libXft-lcd: one relevant patch (the others should be dropped and the Fedora patches used instead) and I really don't see why that cannot go into Fedora instead. Please get those 2 patches (1 per package) accepted by upstream and by the Fedora maintainers, pointing out they actually REMOVE potentially patented code and leave it up to freetype whether to provide it or not (and Fedora's freetype doesn't). * fontconfig-lcd: the config files from the patches 04 and 06 should be provided by freetype-freeworld instead, fontconfig-lcd should be dropped entirely -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #12 from David Hlacik <david(a)hlacik.eu&gt; 2009-04-15 16:46:56 --- Hi Kevin, Yes, you are right. This is Fedora not Ubuntu. My approach to drop all Fedora Patches and use only Ubuntu is wrong. Thank you for your time on reviewing. The needed patches are following : 1) for libXft - (a) libXft-2.1.10-lcd-filter-3.patch 2) for cairo - (b) 04_lcd_filter.dpatch - (c) cairo-respect-fontconfig.patch The patch (c) fixes problem, where cairo ignores font hinting configuration defined in fonts configuration files. 3) however I would like to see 06_ubuntu_lcddefault.patch in fontconfig. Now after reading your recommendations I suggest to at first contact cairo and libXft package maintainers to add (a)(b)(c) patches with your point. How should I contact them? Should i issue bug in Redhat's bugzilla? Br, D. -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #14 from David Hlacik <david(a)hlacik.eu&gt; 2009-04-17 09:13:07 --- (In reply to comment #13) Hi Kevin, I have created 2 bugs so far in RedHat's bugzilla ; 1) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496191 , for cairo 2) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496192, for libXft -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at&gt; 2009-04-18 19:48:02 --- I guess we can have RPM Fusion builds with these patches until they get upstreamed. By the way, Qt 4.5 has a similar patch already upstream, but we currently had to disable it because it displays garbage with VRGB/VBGR: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490377 Any help getting this fixed would be appreciated. -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 James Heather <j.heather(a)surrey.ac.uk&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |j.heather(a)surrey.ac.uk --- Comment #18 from James Heather <j.heather(a)surrey.ac.uk&gt; 2009-07-02 10:26:52 --- Hiya, I was wondering what the status on this is? The suggestion back in April was that RPM Fusion would get these packages until Fedora decides to do something about it... is that still the case? (I can't see them in there at the moment.) I did try installing the F10 packages from power.polarion.com, but I am using F11; the fontconfig-lcd package conflicts with fontconfig. The suggestion in the original bug description is that the packages shouldn't create any conflicts but are just sticking things in ld.so.conf.d to override defaults. But that might be a difference between F10 and F11. The polarion site didn't seem to have F11 builds. James -- 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.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547 Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hobbes1069(a)gmail.com Blocks|2, 30 | Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #20 from Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; 2011-10-06 16:44:34 --- There's been no activity on this review request for greater than 1 year, therefore it will be closed. If there is still interest please reopen the bug and make sure to re-add blocks for bugs 2 (Review Request) and 30 (Sponsorship) as appropriate. -- 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.