Debian Bug report logs - #835273
fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:30:13 +1200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: fonts-liberation
Version: 2.00.1-2
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

Liberation 2 fonts lack the high-quality hinting used in Liberation 1 fonts.
Please allow users to choose Liberation 1 fonts.

I have attached two tiny snapshots snippets showing a Thunar toolbar with
Liberation Sans 11pt at 96 dpi set as the desktop font. Full hinting is set in
both cases, with antialiasing and no subpixel hinting. Yes, full hinting,
although you would not believe it from looking at the Liberation 2 snapshot,
which is a blurry mess.

This problem has been known since 2012:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239

Even Fedora has not switched to Liberation 2, not in Fedora 24, or even in the
upcoming Fedora 25. If Red Hat will not eat their own dog food, why should
Debian?
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/liberation-fonts

Please either downgrade fonts-liberation to use 1.07-4 or split these two fonts
into two different packages as they are quite different.

Kind regards,
Ben.



-- Package-specific info:
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name           Version      Architecture Description
+++-==============-============-============-=================================
ii  fontconfig     2.11.0-6.6   amd64        generic font configuration librar
ii  libfreetype6:a 2.6.3-3+b1   amd64        FreeType 2 font engine, shared li
ii  libfreetype6:i 2.6.3-3+b1   i386         FreeType 2 font engine, shared li
ii  libxft2:amd64  2.3.2-1      amd64        FreeType-based font drawing libra

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.6.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

-- no debconf information

[Liberation-1.png (image/png, attachment)]

[Liberation-2.png (image/png, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vladimir K <pzs-fs@yandex.ru>

To: 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 09:57:41 +0300

Agreed. After encountering new Liberation fonts on Arch, I was very happy that Debian did not pull this version of Liberation for several years until now. Hinting is really terrible.

Message #15 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Fabian Greffrath" <fabian@debian.org>

To: "Ben Caradoc-Davies" <ben@transient.nz>, 835273@bugs.debian.org

Cc: "Holger Levsen" <holger@layer-acht.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 13:39:24 +0200

Holger,

> Please either downgrade fonts-liberation to use 1.07-4 or split these two
> fonts into two different packages as they are quite different.

what do you suggest? Should we re-introduce fonts-liberation 1.x as
fonts-liberation1 package with "Breaks: fonts-liberation" (and maybe the
Condensed style split out into a fonts-liberation1-sans-condensed
package)?

Thanks!

 - Fabian

Message #20 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>

To: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

Cc: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>, 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:48:29 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 01:39:24PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> > Please either downgrade fonts-liberation to use 1.07-4 or split these two
> > fonts into two different packages as they are quite different.
> what do you suggest? Should we re-introduce fonts-liberation 1.x as
> fonts-liberation1 package with "Breaks: fonts-liberation" (and maybe the
> Condensed style split out into a fonts-liberation1-sans-condensed
> package)?

I'm not sure what I suggest, introducing a fonts-liberation-1.7 source package
seems backward to me. Maybe just file an upstream bug?


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #25 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>

To: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>, Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

Cc: 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 01:11:50 +1200

On 24/08/16 23:48, Holger Levsen wrote:
> I'm not sure what I suggest, introducing a fonts-liberation-1.7 source package
> seems backward to me. Maybe just file an upstream bug?

There is an upstream bug, filed in 2012. Red Hat have had four years to 
address this problem. Their fix was to kick Liberation 2 out of Fedora 
18 and stick with Liberation 1:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239

Fedora 25 is still scheduled to use Liberation 1.

I think this was a sensible decision as the new SIL licence and extra 
glyphs do not in my view compensate for the loss of decent hinting. 
Liberation 1 was a magnificent achievement and is still a good choice 
today. It is by no means obsolete. I am yet to find another open source 
font family that is as readable and versatile and also plays nicely with 
fontconfig.

The main problem is that Red Hat decided to reuse the Liberation name; 
if they had chosen a new name, we would not be having this problem.

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Message #30 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>

To: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>, 835273@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 00:52:46 +1200

On 24/08/16 23:39, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> what do you suggest? Should we re-introduce fonts-liberation 1.x as
> fonts-liberation1 package with "Breaks: fonts-liberation" (and maybe the
> Condensed style split out into a fonts-liberation1-sans-condensed
> package)?

Perhaps a fonts-liberation1 and fonts-liberation2 that "Breaks:" each 
other and both provide the same virtual package? Ideally the virtual 
package would be called fonts-liberation, but this is taken by the 
current non-virtual package. I do not know the cleanest way to handle a 
transition from a non-virtual to a virtual package. This might require 
the advice of an apt guru.

Splitting out the condensed (I think they call it narrow?) font might be 
unnecessary complexity at this stage.

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Message #35 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

To: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>, 835273@bugs.debian.org, Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:07:24 +0200

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi all!

Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2016, 01:11 +1200 schrieb Ben Caradoc-Davies:
> > > Fedora 25 is still scheduled to use Liberation 1.

I didn't even know (or maybe simply forgot) that Fedora reverted back
to using Liberation 1.x for quality concerns. If this is still the
case, as you state it, we should maybe follow suit and simply re-upload 
the previous package as 1:1.07.4-2 (i.e. with an epoch).

> I think this was a sensible decision as the new SIL licence and extra 
> glyphs do not in my view compensate for the loss of decent hinting. 
> Liberation 1 was a magnificent achievement and is still a good choice 
> today. It is by no means obsolete. I am yet to find another open source 
> font family that is as readable and versatile and also plays nicely with 
> > fontconfig.

The Google CrOS Core Fonts in the fonts-croscore package are mostly the
same as the Liberation 2.x fonts with changed names. It would be
interesting if you could provide a critical review with regard to
hinting. I myself seem to be mostly blind to such subtle details. :/

> Perhaps a fonts-liberation1 and fonts-liberation2 that "Breaks:" each 
> other and both provide the same virtual package? Ideally the virtual 
> package would be called fonts-liberation, but this is taken by the 
> current non-virtual package. I do not know the cleanest way to handle a 
> transition from a non-virtual to a virtual package. This might require 
> the advice of an apt guru.

We could still have both font versions in separate packages with
slightly different names and simple Breaks relations. No virtual
packages and Apt Voodoo required.

> Splitting out the condensed (I think they call it narrow?) font might be 
> unnecessary complexity at this stage.

If we re-introduced fonts-liberation 1.x with a different package name,
we'd have to pass the NEW queue again, anyway. So, splitting the
condensed style into a separate package would be no problem.

Thanks for your comments!

 - Fabian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=BY70
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #40 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>

To: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

Cc: 835273@bugs.debian.org, Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:16:21 +1200

On 26/08/16 08:07, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> I didn't even know (or maybe simply forgot) that Fedora reverted back
> to using Liberation 1.x for quality concerns. If this is still the
> case, as you state it, we should maybe follow suit and simply re-upload
> the previous package as 1:1.07.4-2 (i.e. with an epoch).

Fabian, re-uploading with epoch 1 seems like a good solution 
(1:1.07.4-2). Adding an epoch is exactly how Fedora implemented the 
switch back to Liberation 1:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=721797

I am not a font expert and have no opinion on the relative merits of 
hinting in Liberation 1 versus croscore.

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Message #45 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

To: 835273 <835273@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 06:32:39 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

[Resending to the bug's address.]

Hi all!

Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2016, 01:11 +1200 schrieb Ben Caradoc-Davies:
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Fedora 25 is still scheduled to use Liberation 1.

I didn't even know (or maybe simply forgot) that Fedora reverted back
to using Liberation 1.x for quality concerns. If this is still the
case, as you state it, we should maybe follow suit and simply re-
upload 
the previous package as 1:1.07.4-2 (i.e. with an epoch).

> 
> I think this was a sensible decision as the new SIL licence and
> extra 
> glyphs do not in my view compensate for the loss of decent hinting. 
> Liberation 1 was a magnificent achievement and is still a good
> choice 
> today. It is by no means obsolete. I am yet to find another open
> source 
> font family that is as readable and versatile and also plays nicely
> with 
> > 
> > fontconfig.

The Google CrOS Core Fonts in the fonts-croscore package are mostly the
same as the Liberation 2.x fonts with changed names. It would be
interesting if you could provide a critical review with regard to
hinting. I myself seem to be mostly blind to such subtle details. :/

> 
> Perhaps a fonts-liberation1 and fonts-liberation2 that "Breaks:"
> each 
> other and both provide the same virtual package? Ideally the virtual 
> package would be called fonts-liberation, but this is taken by the 
> current non-virtual package. I do not know the cleanest way to handle
> a 
> transition from a non-virtual to a virtual package. This might
> require 
> the advice of an apt guru.

We could still have both font versions in separate packages with
slightly different names and simple Breaks relations. No virtual
packages and Apt Voodoo required.

> 
> Splitting out the condensed (I think they call it narrow?) font might
> be 
> unnecessary complexity at this stage.

If we re-introduced fonts-liberation 1.x with a different package name,
we'd have to pass the NEW queue again, anyway. So, splitting the
condensed style into a separate package would be no problem.

Thanks for your comments!

 - Fabian

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #50 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Fabian Greffrath" <fabian@debian.org>

To: "Ben Caradoc-Davies" <ben@transient.nz>, 835273@bugs.debian.org

Cc: "Fabian Greffrath" <fabian@debian.org>, "Holger Levsen" <holger@layer-acht.org>

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:02:32 +0200

Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> Fabian, re-uploading with epoch 1 seems like a good solution
> (1:1.07.4-2). Adding an epoch is exactly how Fedora implemented the
> switch back to Liberation 1:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=721797

Does anyone have objections against "temoprarily" re-uploading
fonts-liberation 1.07 until the hinting issues have been addressed
upstream (and the font is deemed "good enough" for Fedora)?

 - Fabian

Message #55 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>

To: 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:17:43 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:02:32PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Does anyone have objections against "temoprarily" re-uploading
> fonts-liberation 1.07 until the hinting issues have been addressed
> upstream (and the font is deemed "good enough" for Fedora)?

seems good to me too.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #60 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vladimir K <pzs-fs@yandex.ru>

To: "835273@bugs.debian.org" <835273@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#835273: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 23:12:06 +0300

 On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:02:32PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>  Does anyone have objections against "temoprarily" re-uploading
>  fonts-liberation 1.07 until the hinting issues have been addressed
>  upstream (and the font is deemed "good enough" for Fedora)?

There is nothing more permanent than "temporary". 
IMHO, that would be the best decision in current circumstances. Liberation v1 has high quality hinting. Autohint fails miserably on hairline glyph rendering. Perhaps it would not matter any more when ultra hi-res displays become a majority and no glyph would need to be rendered 1 pixel thick. But not today.

Message #65 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

To: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>, 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: Bug#835273: fonts-liberation: Liberation 2 fonts poorly hinted

Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 21:19:30 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Am Freitag, den 26.08.2016, 12:17 +0000 schrieb Holger Levsen:
> seems good to me too.

I will re-upload 1.07.x soon.

Also, I have an idea for fonts-liberation 2.x: I'd like to package them
in a separate source package and make the binary package co-installable 
with fonts-liberation 1.07.x by installing the actual TTF files into a
different directory (e.g. /u/s/fonts/liberation2). Since the fonts
share the same names, fontconfig will always prefer the 2.x variants
because of their higher version numbers. This way, it is possible to
override fonts-liberation for most packages using fontforge (and not
explicitely accessing the fonts by full path) while still keeping the
Sans Narrow variant available. I would document this in README.Debian.

What do you think?

 - Fabian

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #70 received at 835273-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

To: 835273-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#835273: fixed in fonts-liberation 1:1.07.4-2

Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 22:22:38 +0000

Source: fonts-liberation
Source-Version: 1:1.07.4-2

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
fonts-liberation, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 835273@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org> (supplier of updated fonts-liberation package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 23:07:16 +0200
Source: fonts-liberation
Binary: fonts-liberation ttf-liberation
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:1.07.4-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Fonts Task Force <pkg-fonts-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org>
Changed-By: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>
Description:
 fonts-liberation - Fonts with the same metrics as Times, Arial and Courier
 ttf-liberation - transitional dummy package
Closes: 835273
Changes:
 fonts-liberation (1:1.07.4-2) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Revert back to version 1.07.4 until the hinting issues
     of the v2 series have been fixed upstream, c.f.
     https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239
     Closes: #835273. Reopens: #699322.
   * Apply all upstream GIT commits from the
     liberation-fonts-1_07_3 branch since the 1.07.4 release.
Checksums-Sha1:
 a31b80ec293280c98257671ba35e4a0a278ba71e 2288 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.dsc
 4201f3b77fd61608088f96aab9f2dd28388c8e55 2937949 fonts-liberation_1.07.4.orig.tar.gz
 dcbdec2b17f9b45242237b9d5f551ba37c2d3211 16352 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.debian.tar.xz
 d31c7b88f966423885128efb77312ee184a5368c 826982 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb
 620b584ec97b750150359ac46b9b8e2d958d98f3 9878 ttf-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb
Checksums-Sha256:
 d51db467a65d67ede5f6cace49946dd869f3ee3c8f264ee45e7b1c60eacdea5c 2288 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.dsc
 ad98b7498dc2992f7f0868f79b65ce4a720a3acdb63ab3f1f1cb6881117a5406 2937949 fonts-liberation_1.07.4.orig.tar.gz
 69ed4c264ff7a6d998c78d1e7babce4e1b3d8e8899129ec1a9c935f5b8a1ce93 16352 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.debian.tar.xz
 b342d0382aaf8d64a61c347b6e83f84c1ad50aa4ed3df661ece9010fce3ee72a 826982 fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb
 579f811f820e923df3bd108e74ec2e90157ba0b1ea122e96f4a1cfed5b344e23 9878 ttf-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb
Files:
 6904e0f1018e007e78b4edc1b7897c54 2288 fonts optional fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.dsc
 29e1482c6e568503138f7420597e635d 2937949 fonts optional fonts-liberation_1.07.4.orig.tar.gz
 4a021dd6fb6f08990e7bf62fc72a4ee2 16352 fonts optional fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2.debian.tar.xz
 f3da07d074aa5858573f212f3119e5ed 826982 fonts optional fonts-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb
 9cd60f501e4fe943524e66fb6a3bb57c 9878 oldlibs extra ttf-liberation_1.07.4-2_all.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=9X2I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #75 received at 835273@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>

To: Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org>

Cc: 835273@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#835273 closed by Fabian Greffrath <fabian@debian.org> (Bug#835273: fixed in fonts-liberation 1:1.07.4-2)

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 05:43:28 +1200

Thanks very much, Fabian. Confirmed fixed in 1:1.07.4-2.

Kind regards,

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz>
Director
Transient Software Limited <http://transient.nz/>
New Zealand

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.