Le 30/12/2022 à 10:58, Omar Polo a écrit :
On 2022/12/29 19:19:23 +0100, Joel Carnat <j...@carnat.net> wrote:
Le 29/12/2022 à 12:42, Stuart Henderson a écrit :
For the fonts I think I'd probably pick a couple that already exist in
ports/fonts. Simplest approach for ports layout is probably like
ports/fonts/nerd-fonts/{terminus,profont,noto) or similar, using the release
zips rather than downloading the full repo, factoring out as much as possible
to Makefile.inc.
Attached is an archive to deploy such
ports/fonts/nerd-fonts/{terminus,profont,noto}. I'm sorry, I couldn't find the
proper cvs command to generate the diff file for those.
it's not straightforward to generate a diff that adds directory,
tarball for new ports are fine.
Does this seem right?
looks good to me. just some nitpicks
- REVISION starts empty, then goes 0, 1, ... so dropped it
- COMMENT and CATEGORIES can be moved to Makefile.inc too
- could set PKG_ARCH=*
I probably got too overboard then but if you define NF_FONT with the
capitalized name (i.e. CodeNewRoman instead of codenewroman) you can
move PKGNAME, DISTFILES and EXTRACT_SUFX to Makefile.inc, with the
only package affected being 'ubunut-mono' becoming 'ubuntumono'.
it could also use the font.port.mk module, allowing to drop all the
do-install targets. (well, kept the licenses installing as
post-install.)
(for a moment I thought of defining NF_FONT=${.CURDIR:T} and renaming
the dirs, that would made most of the makefiles a one-liner, too
extreme tho.)
This looks great, thank you.
I noticed that some fonts (Lilex and 3270) provide both otf and ttf. I'm not
sure whether it makes sense to ship both or only one. I've never used them though.
Regards,
Joel C.
