Comment 4 for bug 1512111

Paul Sladen (sladen) wrote :

The test case suggests a change to 'Ubuntu Mono', but the '' I have here doesn't have any Ubuntu Mono (nor source, nor changelog, nor scripting, nor test cases, nor any contextual information). I can see:

  2016-01-04 11:31 Zip file (repacked today?)
  2015-12-04 10:55 .ttfs
  2015-12-04 10:53:12..10:53:39, internal timestamps (three-second intervals)

The two positive takeaways are that the version debug glyph shows 0.831, and from the close-interval timestamps we can deduce that the change(s) were made in an automated fashion. The question remains *what those changes are*.

We can see eg:

  $ otfinfo -s {,/usr/share/fonts/truetype/ubuntu-font-family/}Ubuntu-R.ttf

That the 0.84 files already out in the real world have flags indicating 'Hebrew' and 'Default', which these don't. Since these support less than than the higher-numbered version out there, it remains:

  * What are these files for. What is their purpose, what is supposed to be tested.
  * Are they even targetted for distribution. If so what are we supposed to do with them when they have a lower version number and less functionality.