Package Details: ttf-vista-fonts 1-8

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/ttf-vista-fonts.git (read-only)
Package Base: ttf-vista-fonts
Description: Microsoft Vista True Type Fonts
Upstream URL: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/confirmation.aspx?id=13
Licenses: custom
Conflicts: ttf-ms-extrafonts
Replaces: vista-fonts
Submitter: mutlu_inek
Maintainer: jnbek
Last Packager: jnbek
Votes: 400
Popularity: 4.365575
First Submitted: 2007-04-14 19:58
Last Updated: 2015-06-16 22:23

Latest Comments

Ketsuban commented on 2015-03-23 16:17

I notice you only extract Cambria from the TTC, rather than both Cambria and Cambria Math. This is unfortunate for those of us who want to use the math font in TeX. The following diff when applied to the PKGBUILD will extract both Cambria and Cambria Math from the TTC file rather than just Cambria.

28c28,29
< FONTFORGE_LANGUAGE=ff fontforge -c 'Open("cambria.ttc"); Generate("cambria.ttf")'
---
> FONTFORGE_LANGUAGE=ff fontforge -c 'Open("cambria.ttc(Cambria)"); Generate("cambria.ttf")'
> FONTFORGE_LANGUAGE=ff fontforge -c 'Open("cambria.ttc(Cambria Math)"); Generate("cambria math.ttf")'

jnbek commented on 2014-03-25 21:21

@Marcel_K: I've uploaded the PKGBUILD as you provided, looks good and thank you once again for your invaluable feedback.

reflexing commented on 2014-03-25 13:35

@Marcel_K okay then! :P

Marcel_K commented on 2014-03-25 13:26

@reflexing: it's simple: I do not have a copy of Windows 8.1, only XP and 7.

reflexing commented on 2014-03-25 05:38

@jnbek but… but my package builds fine too!

jnbek commented on 2014-03-24 22:33

pfft, this one builds, that's why :-P

reflexing commented on 2014-03-24 06:50

@Marcel_K why bother with Vista fonts when you can use 8.1 fonts (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ttf-ms-win8/)? There are huge versions bump, and you're gonna violate EULA anyway :)

Marcel_K commented on 2014-03-23 20:31

BTW, you don't have to first rename the file eula to license.txt, then create a directory in $pkgdir and then copy the file. You can do this all in one step, see the last line (before }) in the updated PKGBUILD.

Moreover, the license file doesn't need to be named license.txt. In fact, most of the license files on my system are called LICENSE. You can even safely name it EULA (as the original file in PPV.exe was called), namcap won't complain.

jnbek commented on 2014-03-23 18:26

@Marcel_K: thanks, I'll take a look at it this evening. I appreciate the feedback.

Marcel_K commented on 2014-03-23 16:43

Some other suggestions for improving the PKGBUILD here:

1. Please enclose all instances with double quotes to allow for spaces in directory names.
2. You can use the --filter option (or -F) to cabextract to only extract *.tt[fc] files.
3. There is a bug somewhere that prevents selection of Cambria Regular in LibreOffice. Converting cambria.ttc to cambria.ttf using FontForge resolves this issue (kudos to Martin Schmölzer who put this in the PKGBUILD of ttf-win7-fonts).

As a test I implemented all these steps in a new PKGBUILD (it works correctly) and put it on http://pastebin.com/pp25faj1

jnbek commented on 2013-11-12 04:49

hmm, I wonder how my last comment got deleted... I got your email reflexer, but yea, it's cool :D I needed to do a few things with this package anyway to fix some namcap spew. Enjoy :D

reflexing commented on 2013-11-12 03:25

@jnbek sorry, it was an accident :)

jnbek commented on 2013-11-11 21:32

so, reflexing... how is this out of date?

jnbek commented on 2013-11-11 21:32

so, reflexing... how is this out of date?

jnbek commented on 2013-04-29 21:50

@verbote, I'm having a big of a problem getting the secondary cabextract sorted out. I can get makepkg to unpack the exe file, but it's not extracting the resulting cab file, I'm probably just missing something... if all else fails I'll remove the first one, since it does seem a little...... redundant to have makepkg extract the exe file, just to cabextract the exe file before cabextracting the cab file.. ( Say that 10 times real fast ). I'm open to suggestions, here.. on a side note, I'm down to 56 Perl Packages that are in need of updating by hand!! Unfortunately, I was very busy this weekend sorting out a gaggle of family issues for my sis-in-law and her squad, I sat down no less than 30 times to play with this, and got interrupted, sidetracked or some other form of irreversible distraction. Thx for the patience.

jnbek commented on 2013-04-26 19:05

@ DaveCode, I said caution, not meh, if you have a suggestion then say so. Accusing Debianista is kind of gross, my caution against PKGBUILD changes does not equate to "I'm a pretentious jerkface that is too busy and/or lazy to address issues" it equates to "a lot ppl use this, if something breaks, they're going to get mad and maybe stop using this.." with the whole "don't fix what ain't broke" mentality. Yes ARCH 'has' changed alot.. I've had to go through almost 700 Perl packages bringing them up to date with pacman 4.1, I also work fulltime as a sysadmin and manage a very large family, while contributing to the Arch community a great deal, with over 700 AUR packages, an Unofficial User Repo, help in the IRC room and work locally with new Arch users to get them up to speed. so while ARCH/pacman have changed alot since this package was born, this package does still work, so if i err to caution, so be it. If you have a valuable idea to contribute, please, by all means do... But do not accuse me of 'Debianista' because of my apprehension to making changes to one of the most popular AUR packages in the system.
-- jnbek
Pretentious Jerkface

DaveCode commented on 2013-04-26 11:32

Voted for this package. Mod that opinion on changing PKGBUILDs. It sounds like a Debianista (as does "meh" which makes me barf). In those 6 years, Arch has changed a LOT. PKGBUILDs need to keep pace. We use Arch not Debian for a reason.

jnbek commented on 2013-03-22 19:25

@vorbote, I will look into that, I am however rather skeptical about making too many changes to this PKGBUILD as it is and has been working very well for over 6 years. Being in the top 60 highest rated pkg out of 41000+ affords great caution with regard to PKGBUILD changes. I will however take a look at your suggestion and go from there. I appreciate your concern.

vorbote commented on 2013-03-22 13:02

There is no need to use cabextract at all. Pacman is linked to libarchive and it will handle file extraction by itself automatically. You can use ttf-ms-fonts' PKGBUILD as an example of how this works.

Anonymous comment on 2013-01-25 20:07

You're welcome! :)

jnbek commented on 2013-01-25 20:04

hrm, thanks @AkiraYB, perhaps i should as well :)

Anonymous comment on 2013-01-25 20:02

He probably used namcap: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Namcap

jnbek commented on 2013-01-25 19:59

Meh, your changes didn't break anything, so I'll acquiesce to your request, however loquacious it came across ;-) In the future please be verbose about what commands were executed in order to get the reported errors for more rapid dispensation of said offense.

jnbek commented on 2013-01-25 19:45

@coyote25, so... I'm not sure how you got those errors... care to elaborate how one goes about replicating this offensive spew?

Anonymous comment on 2013-01-25 17:54

PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $pkgdir instead of $startdir/pkg
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $pkgdir instead of $startdir/pkg
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $pkgdir instead of $startdir/pkg
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $srcdir instead of $startdir/src
PKGBUILD (ttf-vista-fonts) E: Use $pkgdir instead of $startdir/pkg

In short, replace your build() with:

build() {
mkdir -p $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver
cabextract --lowercase $srcdir/PowerPointViewer.exe -d $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver
cabextract --lowercase $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver/ppviewer.cab -d $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver
mkdir -p $pkgdir/usr/share/fonts/TTF
install -m644 $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver/*.{ttf,ttc} $pkgdir/usr/share/fonts/TTF
mv $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver/eula $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver/license.txt
mkdir -p $pkgdir/usr/share/licenses/$pkgname
install -D -m644 $srcdir/$pkgname-$pkgver/license.txt $pkgdir/usr/share/licenses/$pkgname
}

jnbek commented on 2012-07-19 15:49

Updated to the May 25, 2011 release. I'll try to keep up on this pkg, however, any problems, aside from the acquisition of the files will need to be resolved elsewhere, I do not have the energy nor the desire to track down bug fixes for Microsoft software, but I will attempt to keep the releases up to date. Sorry for the past 6 months.

mailson commented on 2012-04-07 01:13

It seems that package 'fontforge' is required

mutlu_inek commented on 2012-01-23 11:52

I was quite busy recently, I will devote some time to this PKGBUILD in the near future. I hope I can iron out some of the rendering issues. Thanks to everyone for the pointers.

erm67 commented on 2012-01-10 22:25

Hi there is newer powerpointviewer 2010, the pkgbuild works almost unchanged.
see here: http://pastebin.com/QxMmubGR

erm67 commented on 2012-01-10 22:23

Hi there is newer powerpointviewer 2010, the pkgbuild works almost unchanged.
see here: http://pastebin.com/QxMmubGR

Shanto commented on 2011-07-27 21:11

Also see: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=86976

(Yes, we can fix these with personal fonts.conf, but having these fixes included in this AUR package, bundled with the offending fonts is another thing (DRY))

Shanto commented on 2011-07-27 20:45

It seems like we need a fontconfig file with this package to fix rendering issues for character combinations like tt, ft, ti and fi (apparent in FireFox) with these fonts. For example, when a web page asks for Calibri (such as http://www.podciborski.co.uk/unix-news/can-unity-create-first-consumer-class-linux-distro/), FF renders the text great except the character combinations mentioned above appear somewhat blurred/bold but not exactly - it's weird.

http://pastebin.com/bYY7U0wn worked for me to fix Calibri. But, I am sure that other fonts (needs testing) should be included here when it goes with a package.

See also: http://askubuntu.com/questions/21097/configure-fontconfig-to-ignore-bitmaps-in-scalable-fonts

dapolinario commented on 2011-07-15 18:59

Update PKGBUILD for a compatible version namcap.
My version of the PKGBUILD: http://pastebin.com/shfm9Eq8

reflexing commented on 2011-06-04 11:58

I think this package should be renamed to ttf-ms-extrafonts (which was deleted from AUR), because this fonts aren't specific to Vista (although they were introduced with it), but to all Vista+ MS programs. It's just confusing.

mutlu_inek commented on 2011-03-10 13:26

@louipc: the license is in the package. And yes, this may be illegal in some countries and not in others. If you are curious as to what the differences ("more liberal") are to the other package on the AUR, please read the respective licenses.

louipc commented on 2011-03-05 02:48

Thanks for your comments olive.
We still need the maintainer to include a copy of the license in the package.

olive commented on 2011-03-04 01:32

@louipc These font comes from Powerpoint viewer 2007. According to:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=cb9bf144-1076-4615-9951-294eeb832823

You may use the fonts that accompany the PowerPoint Viewer only to display and print content from a device running a Microsoft

So using this package may well be illegal (I am not a lawyer, I cannot say if this is really enforceable).

olive commented on 2011-03-04 01:32

@louipc These font comes from Powerpoint viewer 2007. According to:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=cb9bf144-1076-4615-9951-294eeb832823

You may use the fonts that accompany the PowerPoint Viewer only to display and print content from a device running a Microsoft

So using this package may well be illegal (I am not a lawyer, I cannot say if this is really enforceable).

louipc commented on 2010-12-15 04:09

Well, I was thinking that the name of this package is misleading.
Maybe it should be called ttf-powerpoint-fonts instead.

You said the license is more liberal than another Microsoft font package.
Can you please include the license in the package? Thanks.

dapolinario commented on 2010-12-15 02:39

Also add the dependencies 'xorg-fonts-encodings'.

mutlu_inek commented on 2010-12-14 19:44

True. Fixed.

dapolinario commented on 2010-12-14 19:41

Fonts should be arch=('any')

mutlu_inek commented on 2010-12-14 18:38

@ louipic: I changed the URI to point to the new location. The package itself has not changed, however. I am not sure what is difficult to understand about how this PKGBUILD works. It should be self-explanatory. Just to make clear: it downloads the Powerpoint viewer and extracts the font files. The reason for this is that the license of this package is more liberal than that of the new (and superfluous) ttf-ms-extrafonts. In fact, there is no reason the latter package was created on the AUR. It should be removed.

louipc commented on 2010-12-11 17:22

The package website is invalid. I'm confused though.

You're fetching powerpoint viewer which is found here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=048dc840-14e1-467d-8dca-19d2a8fd7485&displaylang=en

But Microsoft has a page dedicated to Vista fonts and typography here:
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/product.aspx?PID=149

It would be nice if you can explain what's happening in a comment in the PKGBUILD.
Thanks.

jt512 commented on 2010-12-03 21:12

Those fonts are provided by ttf-ms-extrafonts. That package should be in the "conflicts" array.

thestinger commented on 2010-11-24 00:36

ttf-ms-fonts doesn't provide those

use pacman -Qo to find out what does

this package DOES conflict with ttf-ms-extrafonts, because they provide the same thing in different ways

jt512 commented on 2010-11-24 00:31

Proceed with installation? [Y/n]
checking package integrity...
(1/1) checking for file conflicts [##############################] 100%
error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/calibri.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/calibrib.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/calibrii.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/calibriz.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/cambriab.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/cambriai.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/cambriaz.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/candara.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/candarab.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/candarai.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/candaraz.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/consola.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/consolab.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/consolai.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/consolaz.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/constan.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/constanb.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/constani.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/constanz.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/corbel.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/corbelb.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/corbeli.ttf exists in filesystem
ttf-vista-fonts: /usr/share/fonts/TTF/corbelz.ttf exists in filesystem

Does this package conflict with ttf-ms-fonts?

Gently commented on 2010-11-11 22:48

Why is this flagged out-of-date? Works perfectly fine for me.

Anonymous comment on 2010-09-26 06:53

Fonts should be arch=('any')