Comment 114 for bug 502610

Revision history for this message
In , Qianqian Fang (fangq) wrote :

<email address hidden> wrote:
>
>
> You are misunderstanding the point then. I'm not saying that the order should
> be provided by the font upstream. providing the separate rule by font upstream
> should be easier to change the order by distro or the users with the prefix
> priority say. as I said to you on Red Hat Bugzilla too, thus all of the
> fontconfig config files shouldn't contains any other font names in it. Since
> this is a kinda preference, the order should just leave to the distro or the
> users. that's why I think having the minimal sets of the rule in fontconfig
> upstream should be sufficient.
>

again, I think we are talking on different pages.
What you want to propose is to change the fontconfig config file
basic schemes, and what I want is to renovate it and fine-tune.

As I said previously, it would be more efficient if you
submit another bug to discuss the new proposal.

I personally don't think your "other-font-names-free-rule" is
sufficient to handle the complex CJK situations. In addition,
using the basic rules I proposed does not conflict to
what you want to do. The only difference is that fontconfig
has some basic memory about good and bad fonts, and your
approach erase all the memories of fontconfig, and
font packagers make all the decisions by manipulating the
priority numbers.

Also, if the packager for Font A think it is better
than Font B, and the packager for B think opposite.
How would you solve it? let them fight by competing
the priority numbers?

>
>>> it's the above point and what Fedora is trying. the unnecessary
>>> built-in rules are worse than nothing.
>>>
>>>
>> how are these rules unnecessary? tell me.
>>
>>
>
> My objection to get rid of these (65-nonlatin.conf and similar for your
> proposed rules) files in upstream because they:
>
> - prevents to have different order with additional rules.
>

it doesn't. just name your file with a priority less than 65.
if you name it bigger than 65, then use prepend_first in your rules.

> - which mixing up several fontnames in one file requires the certain knowledges
> and skills to modify it for users.
>

on the opposite, because it is centralized, it is easier
for users to modify. The most frustrating thing
using fontconfig is that when I modify one place to set
font orders, the rules never work because multiple other
config files overwrite it. It is impossible for ordinary
users to trace which one is actually functioning. The
approach you proposed is very likely leading to increasing
frustrations of such kind.

> - plus, need to modify two files to change the order at least. 65-nonlatin.conf
> (or similar) and the prefix priority in separate config file from the font
> package.
>

no

>
> I want to just update the prefix priority in the config filename to change the
> order. it would works enough without 65-nonlatin.conf say, and easy enough.
> Aside from that, speaking of the fallback, I did in vlgotnic-{,p}-fonts in
> Fedora to behave some fallback with separate files for Japanese like
> sans-serif->VL PGothic->VL Gothic.
>
> % ls /etc/fonts/conf.d/*vlgothic*
> /etc/fonts/conf.d/65-vlgothic-pgothic.conf@
> /etc/fonts/conf.d/66-vlgothic-gothic.conf@
>
> See the attached files for the details of the config files.
>
>
>