There is a bug for fedora review [1] to add some basic support for font
packages. It shouldn't be that hard, but time is limited.
One concern is that font specfiles are hard to parse because of the
%_font_pkg macro. The problem is that it "hides" the %files directive
which is what we use to locate the section (that we have to parse
ourselves instead of using rpm's parser is a long story).
Now, anything is possible. But according to the discussion in [2], fpc
nowadays seems very firm about that macros should not include any
section parts like %files, so %_font_pkg should most likely not have
been approved as-is today (?)
So: should the situation be rectified to comply with fpc's view,
probably with a new macro not including %files + deprecating %_font_pkg?
Not only for fedora-review (which will have to handle %_font_pkg
anyway), but for consistency?
--alec
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/ticket/215
[2] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/194
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list
fonts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
http://fonts.fedoraproject.org/
