Search Criteria
Package Details: fonts-meta-base 1-3
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/fonts-meta-base.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | fonts-meta-base |
Description: | Base font collection meta package, ported from Infinality. |
Upstream URL: | https://web.archive.org/web/20160703182257/http://bohoomil.com:80/doc/05-fonts/ |
Licenses: | GPL |
Conflicts: | ibfonts-meta-base |
Provides: | ibfonts-meta-base |
Submitter: | jurf |
Maintainer: | CommodoreCrunch |
Last Packager: | CommodoreCrunch |
Votes: | 92 |
Popularity: | 0.21 |
First Submitted: | 2017-01-08 15:14 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2021-08-05 16:54 (UTC) |
Latest Comments
nTia89 commented on 2020-03-30 07:39 (UTC)
@CommodoreCrunch @Vash63, I am (and already was when suggested you the change) aware of this issue and this is a well-known "AUR helper" long stand issue. My suggestion is to have
font-symbola
in the deps array: 1) you can notice AURweb (this web page...) works well by providing us the two alternatives (otf-symbola, ttf-symbola) and 2) as @CommodoreCrunch stated below, pacman that's having the ability to "solve" this dependency, works well, as wellCommodoreCrunch commented on 2020-03-30 00:10 (UTC)
I'm left with two bad options here. I can either explicitly require ttf-symbola and break any compatibility with otf-symbola, or ignore the fact that some AUR helpers handle this poorly. If I tell pacman to install "java-environment", it gives me a list of providers. Ideally, helpers should do the same, but I guess some don't. In some ways, that's out of the scope of what I should be worrying about, given that AUR helpers aren't really supported anyway. I don't know.
Vash63 commented on 2020-03-29 23:58 (UTC)
The change to requiring 'font-symbola' instead of 'ttf-symbola' breaks AUR helpers as that package doesn't exist on its own, only as a 'provides'. If you manually install ttf-symbola first then this package installs fine, but simply attempting to pull this package causes a dependency check failure, at least with aurutils.
nTia89 commented on 2020-03-25 21:04 (UTC)
ttf-symbola package have been updated; now it provides symbola.{ttf,otf}; I suggest to upgrade dependency to "font-symbola" instead of "ttf-symbola" as new package provides it; in this way, both kind of fonts format are "supported"
CommodoreCrunch commented on 2018-03-02 04:59 (UTC) (edited on 2018-03-02 05:12 (UTC) by CommodoreCrunch)
@docrobot SourceForge got hit with what they claim is a DDoS attack early this week and they still haven't fully recovered. If the checksum doesn't match, I honestly wouldn't trust it right now.
EDIT: Yeah, so what gets downloaded right now isn't a tar archive at all, despite the extension. It's just a 600 byte error message.
docrobot commented on 2018-03-02 03:55 (UTC) (edited on 2018-03-02 03:56 (UTC) by docrobot)
==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check! :: Unable to build ttf-heuristica - makepkg exited with code: 1
nTia89 commented on 2017-10-08 10:37 (UTC)
CommodoreCrunch commented on 2017-06-16 18:05 (UTC)
commented on 2017-05-19 07:06 (UTC)
jurf commented on 2017-04-22 13:26 (UTC)
jurf commented on 2017-01-23 10:09 (UTC)
rdoursenaud commented on 2017-01-23 05:52 (UTC) (edited on 2017-01-23 05:54 (UTC) by rdoursenaud)
jurf commented on 2017-01-11 05:16 (UTC)
F1nny commented on 2017-01-10 22:45 (UTC) (edited on 2017-01-10 22:53 (UTC) by F1nny)
edgard commented on 2017-01-10 20:48 (UTC)