Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:52:37 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > [...] >> Meanwhile, it occurred to me that it would be good to let the Fedora >> folks know that this breaks, so I've filed a bug there; we'll see if >> they have any thoughts on the matter as well. > > Actually, I opened: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2271559 > "google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts is not compatible with XeTeX" > > the other day as a bug in google-noto-sans-cjk-vf-fonts. Ah...I filed mine under texlive, no wonder I didn't find yours first :) > In response, Peng Wu (one of font package maintainers) opened: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2272153 > "xelatex doesn't support font face from named instance of variable fonts" > > as a bug in texlive-base. I'm not sure why I didn't find that one, though...I did look. > In #2271559, I was asked to help report this issue to upstream XeTeX, > which is in my to-do list. > > It sounds like there should be a way for XeTeX to identify variable fonts > and ignore them. It seems like it should certainly be possible. We may end up carrying the workaround for a long time, though, before any fix filters through to users. Thanks, jon
