> Is anyone aware of any problems caused by the packages that do place themin
> /usr/share/fonts/WOFF/ or
> /usr/share/fonts/WOFF2/?https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863835This
> refers to Xetex, but may apply to other applications as well. - Fabian Von
> meinem/meiner Galaxy gesendet
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------Von: Soren Stoutner <[email protected]>
Datum: 11.06.26 18:04 (GMT+01:00) An: [email protected], Debian Fonts
<[email protected]> Betreff: Re: Bug#1116004: fonts-noto:
fonts-noto-web is wrong On Wednesday, June 10, 2026 12:39:36 AM Mountain
Standard Time [email protected] wrote:> Am 2026-06-10 01:41, schrieb Soren
Stoutner:> > 1. Is there a general consensus in Debian that WOFF2 and other
web> > fonts> > should be shipped by font packages (when there is a need for
them) and> > that> > they should be installed under /usr/share/fonts/?> > In
the font packages that I maintain, I generally keep the web fonts in> the same
package as the TTF/OTF variants, but keep them out of the> /usr/share/fonts
name space. The reason is that (1) they are duplicates> anyway and (2)
fontconfig may pick them up as valid candidates for font> rendering but they
will mostly fail to get rendered. (I think their> headers look like regular TTF
fonts, but their actual content is> compressed).1. Where do you place them? I
see some examples of
/usr/share/custom-font-directory/.https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/fonts-atkinson-hyperlegible-web/filelist2.
Is anyone aware of any problems caused by the packages that do place them in
/usr/share/fonts/WOFF/ or
/usr/share/fonts/WOFF2/?https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/fonts-dejavu-web/filelisthttps://packages.debian.org/sid/all/fonts-thai-tlwg-web/filelistHere
is an example of a package that does both. I am not sure what the purpose of
that
is:https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/fonts-materialdesignicons-webfont/filelist--
Soren [email protected]
