From ramana at member.fsf.org Tue Mar 15 01:25:35 2016 From: ramana at member.fsf.org (Ramana Kumar) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:25:35 +1100 Subject: [Assist] ec fonts In-Reply-To: <5648FCEC.2090600@riseup.net> References: <20150412170113.GA27532@zebra-laptop.karel> <877fth2ldx.fsf@mtjm.eu> <8738452l03.fsf@mtjm.eu> <20150415214746.GC7993@nil> <20150510231914.GA31935@nil> <561DDC12.6030804@riseup.net> <561DE152.7040409@riseup.net> <87zizm3rty.fsf@ecthelion.vpn.mtjm.eu> <5648FCEC.2090600@riseup.net> Message-ID: So, is there still no progress on this issue? I am going back to the standard Arch Linux texlive package once again... On 16 November 2015 at 08:45, Andr? Silva wrote: > On 10/14/2015 03:08 AM, Micha? Mas?owski wrote: > >>>> I repeat this question one more time: Why does Parabola remove ec > fonts > >>>> from its version of TexLive, and how is it being done exactly? > >>>> (So I can figure out how to patch them back in.) > >>>> There is no freedom-related reason for removing them. (See > >>>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ecfonts.) > >>> > >>> ok, i'll fix it then > > > > Make sure the package complies with the license, it didn't before it was > > removed. (This is a problem of Arch packaging, not upstream.) > > > > The other problem is that it includes code from otherwise nonfree fonts > > and we don't know if the author had permission to use them under a > > different license. > > license problems [0] are in the latest version of Arch's texlive-core > tarball yet, therefore we should do the three things that you mentioned > [1] to solve this issue. > > [0]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/TeXLive_freedom_verification#MeX_license > [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/2015-April/000439.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Assist mailing list > Assist at lists.parabola.nu > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elcorreo at deshackra.com Fri Mar 18 03:07:47 2016 From: elcorreo at deshackra.com (Jorge Araya Navarro) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 21:07:47 -0600 Subject: [Assist] ec fonts In-Reply-To: References: <20150412170113.GA27532@zebra-laptop.karel> <877fth2ldx.fsf@mtjm.eu> <8738452l03.fsf@mtjm.eu> <20150415214746.GC7993@nil> <20150510231914.GA31935@nil> <561DDC12.6030804@riseup.net> <561DE152.7040409@riseup.net> <87zizm3rty.fsf@ecthelion.vpn.mtjm.eu> <5648FCEC.2090600@riseup.net> Message-ID: <8760wkscu4.fsf@abril.charola> It really sucks if you ask me! Sandly it was never clear to me how was people supposed to switch to something like Xelatex in software compilation and packaging that ran latex compilations as one of their steps. El lunes 14 de marzo del 2016 a las 1925 horas, Ramana Kumar escribi?: > So, is there still no progress on this issue? I am going back to the > standard Arch Linux texlive package once again... > > On 16 November 2015 at 08:45, Andr? Silva wrote: > >> On 10/14/2015 03:08 AM, Micha? Mas?owski wrote: >> >>>> I repeat this question one more time: Why does Parabola remove ec >> fonts >> >>>> from its version of TexLive, and how is it being done exactly? >> >>>> (So I can figure out how to patch them back in.) >> >>>> There is no freedom-related reason for removing them. (See >> >>>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ecfonts.) >> >>> >> >>> ok, i'll fix it then >> > >> > Make sure the package complies with the license, it didn't before it was >> > removed. (This is a problem of Arch packaging, not upstream.) >> > >> > The other problem is that it includes code from otherwise nonfree fonts >> > and we don't know if the author had permission to use them under a >> > different license. >> >> license problems [0] are in the latest version of Arch's texlive-core >> tarball yet, therefore we should do the three things that you mentioned >> [1] to solve this issue. >> >> [0]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/TeXLive_freedom_verification#MeX_license >> [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/2015-April/000439.html >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Assist mailing list >> Assist at lists.parabola.nu >> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Assist mailing list > Assist at lists.parabola.nu > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist -- ? Pax et bonum. Jorge Araya Navarro https://es.gravatar.com/shackra From ramana at member.fsf.org Mon Mar 21 03:53:56 2016 From: ramana at member.fsf.org (Ramana Kumar) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 14:53:56 +1100 Subject: [Assist] ec fonts In-Reply-To: <8760wkscu4.fsf@abril.charola> References: <20150412170113.GA27532@zebra-laptop.karel> <877fth2ldx.fsf@mtjm.eu> <8738452l03.fsf@mtjm.eu> <20150415214746.GC7993@nil> <20150510231914.GA31935@nil> <561DDC12.6030804@riseup.net> <561DE152.7040409@riseup.net> <87zizm3rty.fsf@ecthelion.vpn.mtjm.eu> <5648FCEC.2090600@riseup.net> <8760wkscu4.fsf@abril.charola> Message-ID: Andr?, I saw you were about to make progress on this, but then stopped. Did Micha? put you off? Please don't delay any longer. It's a simple issue, and is disrupting work for many of us. On 18 March 2016 at 14:07, Jorge Araya Navarro wrote: > It really sucks if you ask me! Sandly it was never clear to me how was > people supposed to switch to > something like Xelatex in software compilation and packaging that ran > latex compilations as one of > their steps. > > El lunes 14 de marzo del 2016 a las 1925 horas, Ramana Kumar escribi?: > > > So, is there still no progress on this issue? I am going back to the > > standard Arch Linux texlive package once again... > > > > On 16 November 2015 at 08:45, Andr? Silva > wrote: > > > >> On 10/14/2015 03:08 AM, Micha? Mas?owski wrote: > >> >>>> I repeat this question one more time: Why does Parabola remove ec > >> fonts > >> >>>> from its version of TexLive, and how is it being done exactly? > >> >>>> (So I can figure out how to patch them back in.) > >> >>>> There is no freedom-related reason for removing them. (See > >> >>>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ecfonts.) > >> >>> > >> >>> ok, i'll fix it then > >> > > >> > Make sure the package complies with the license, it didn't before it > was > >> > removed. (This is a problem of Arch packaging, not upstream.) > >> > > >> > The other problem is that it includes code from otherwise nonfree > fonts > >> > and we don't know if the author had permission to use them under a > >> > different license. > >> > >> license problems [0] are in the latest version of Arch's texlive-core > >> tarball yet, therefore we should do the three things that you mentioned > >> [1] to solve this issue. > >> > >> [0]:https://wiki.parabola.nu/TeXLive_freedom_verification#MeX_license > >> [1]:https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/assist/2015-April/000439.html > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Assist mailing list > >> Assist at lists.parabola.nu > >> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Assist mailing list > > Assist at lists.parabola.nu > > https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/assist > > > -- > ? Pax et bonum. > Jorge Araya Navarro > https://es.gravatar.com/shackra > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From emulatorman at riseup.net Mon Mar 21 04:31:28 2016 From: emulatorman at riseup.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Andr=c3=a9_Silva?=) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 01:31:28 -0300 Subject: [Assist] ec fonts In-Reply-To: References: <20150412170113.GA27532@zebra-laptop.karel> <877fth2ldx.fsf@mtjm.eu> <8738452l03.fsf@mtjm.eu> <20150415214746.GC7993@nil> <20150510231914.GA31935@nil> <561DDC12.6030804@riseup.net> <561DE152.7040409@riseup.net> <87zizm3rty.fsf@ecthelion.vpn.mtjm.eu> <5648FCEC.2090600@riseup.net> <8760wkscu4.fsf@abril.charola> Message-ID: <56EF7920.4040307@riseup.net> On 03/21/2016 12:53 AM, Ramana Kumar wrote: > Andr?, I saw you were about to make progress on this, but then stopped. > Did Micha? put you off? Please don't delay any longer. It's a simple > issue, and is disrupting work for many of us. ok, i'll begin it tomorrow to get a way to solve this issue! Sorry for the delay since i forgot it. Meanwhile, could you open a report bug about it to labs and assign me to remember about this task? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: