Le lundi 22 décembre 2008 à 15:08 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit : > Le lundi 22 décembre 2008 à 14:56 +0200, Sarantis Paskalis a écrit : > > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 05:13:35PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Hi Sarantis, > 6. However, for fonts that are bundled in a software package with no > other form of release, or fonts which have some additional non-standard > stuff bundled with them (such as TEX packages), I don't think anyone > will complain too loudly if you package them as subpackage(s) of your > main package. As long as the subpackage(s) are clean, > guidelines-compliant, and can be used by Fedora users without dragging > with them your app or TEX or other non-general-purpose stuff. > > For example, for a “tex-foo” TEX package, you could have: > > tex-foo-fonts-fontname1 (normal font subpackage #1) > tex-foo-fonts-fontname2 (normal font subpackage #2) > […] > tex-foo-fonts-common (common font subpackage that owns the fonts dirs > and the fonts-licensing files²) > tex-foo (main TEX package that depends on the > tex-foo-fonts packages, includes symlinks to > the font files in standard locations and > other TEX stuff) > > The subpackaging logic is pretty much the same as in the > spectemplate-fonts-multi.spec template included in fontpackages-devel > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Also, I'm pretty sure the other TEX packagers would be delighted if someone documented this stuff from the TEX POW. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
