infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

xander · 2015-08-05 09:43:15

Hello. Will be Roboto Mono (it's been released a month ago) added to the repo?

P. S. The same question for Iosevka (https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka) and Monoid (https://github.com/larsenwork/monoid).

Last edited by xander (2015-08-05 09:45:46)

bohoomil · 2015-08-05 18:03:40

Roboto Mono and Iosevka -- for sure (check out the repo later tonight). Monoid -- it's already there.

xander · 2015-08-06 12:47:23

Oh, i see, thanks. And, if i understand correctly, the new version of Adobe Source Code Pro was released (with Greek and Cyrillic support): https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-c … F1.030R-it

bohoomil · 2015-08-06 19:03:23

Thanks a lot for the info: I've just updated the packages.

xander · 2015-09-15 20:18:50

M+ outline fonts have been updated to version TESTFLIGHT-60 (available on official site) (this repo contains ver. 059).

bohoomil · 2015-09-16 07:27:00

Thanks a lot -- updated.

xander · 2015-09-21 19:19:00

Adobe Source Sans Pro fonts have been recently updated to 2.020 and 1.075 version: https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-sans-pro/releases
The same for Iosevka (updated to 0.1.12): https://github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/releases

Last edited by xander (2015-09-21 19:20:45)

bohoomil · 2015-09-22 05:56:20

Thanks again -- done.

Neitsab · 2015-11-25 23:59:08

Hi bohoomil, I have two questions and one feature request. Sorry if they've been addressed elsewhere, I wasn't able to find answers in the wiki or in this thread

What is the difference between -ib and -ibx packages?
Should we generally prefer otf- or ttf- packages when the alternative exists?
Would you consider promoting ttf-carlito-ib and ttf-caladea-ib to ibfonts-meta-base?

Although I understand the difference between TrueType and OpenType and would be philosophically more inclined in favor of the most recent standard, I couldn't help but notice the base and extended groups overwhelmingly contain ttf fonts. Does experience favor TrueType?

About point 3: I cannot fathom why such useful fonts as Carlito and Caladea aren't more prominently featured and part of the base group. Compatible replacements for default MS Office fonts are quite a useful thing, aren't they? It is only recently that I discovered their existence, and I felt pretty foolish for missing on better metric compatibility all this time. So why not giving them the same favor as the Liberation family?

And thanks for your fantastic work, it is what saved me from permanent eye sore when I started using Arch a few years ago and got me interested into typography!

Neitsab · 2015-11-26 00:35:18

Other question: why does otf-cantarell-ib look so much bigger in GNOME Shell top panel when installed instead of cantarell-fonts? Does it contain special instructions? I'm using the default shell theme.

bohoomil · 2015-11-29 04:28:02

Hello Neitsab and here we go:

1. The 'x' stands for 'extra'.
2. There is no general recommendation as the quality of both types has improved significantly. Use the format you find better for your screen, eyes, needs. (OTF will usually offer extended typographical features which may be handy for DTP oriented applications.)
3. No, because base is meant to be basic and minimal yet sufficient for typical tasks (viewing and creating documents, web- and UI-friendly). It offers a standard collection of types (serif/sans/mono) and covers most languages based on extended Latin character set as well as a bunch of non-Latin. Everything that might be considered more than bread and butter here can be found in extended and extra groups. Many Archers tend to choose minimal solutions so this is the one for them.

Btw, instead of 'ibfonts-meta-base' install 'ibfonts-meta-extended-lt' and it will automatically pull the base as a dependency.

Does experience favor TrueType?

Experience favors availability and quality. ;-) Usually if specific types are missing from the repository, it means they simply don't exist in a particular format. Sometimes they do exist but may be buggy, etc. For the most part, the maintainer's idiosyncrasy isn't the decisive factor.

why does otf-cantarell-ib look so much bigger in GNOME Shell top panel when installed instead of cantarell-fonts?

We're using a Cantarell branch from CTAN: the upstream's didn't render nicely a few years ago and still has a little bug under the skin. However, I'm considering switching to the official one some day because buggy or not Cantarell isn't my cup of tea. ;-p

thanks for your fantastic work

Thank you -- you're most welcome!

Last edited by bohoomil (2015-11-29 04:32:38)

Neitsab · 2015-12-01 16:00:08

Thanks for your detailed answer bohoomil, I appreciate it!

No, because base is meant to be basic and minimal yet sufficient for typical tasks (viewing and creating documents [...])

Well that was the point I was trying to make: correctly viewing office documents very often means opening MS Office 2007+ made ones, which use Calibri and Cambria by default and incorrectly render without replacement fonts.

Everything that might be considered more than bread and butter here can be found in extended and extra groups. Many Archers tend to choose minimal solutions so this is the one for them.

It seems to me that Calibri- and Cambria-compatible fonts are part of today's bread and butter, and that adding two fonts isn't that much of bloat. Isn't there more overlap between DejaVu and Liberation fonts, especially since the addition of Noto? We have three fonts providing metrically-compatible mono typefaces (Courier Prime, Liberation Mono/Cousine and DejaVu Sans Mono) but no Calibri/Cambria replacements... And Heuristica is also kind of a redundancy now with Noto and Liberation, or am I missing something?

But in the end it's your choice and hey, as a competent user that freely benefits from your work I'll just keep manually installing what I deem necessary. I just wanted to advocate for the inclusion of what appears to me as two very central fonts for many use cases and users

bohoomil · 2015-12-03 03:22:14

@Neitsab I don't really get one thing: in what way renaming a meta package would improve the usability of the repository if you still get what you need under a different name? Carlito and Caladea are part of ibfonts-meta-extended-lite; if you need them, you should simply install this single meta package and the very basic collection will be pulled automatically as a dependency. Where is really the problem then? It's all about the naming convention, nothing else.

Speaking of bread and butter, the basic Latin font set is defined in 60-latin.conf. The example below comes from the Web standards but it is actually relevant for any non-Web document as well:

.main-content{font-family:"Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif}

The basic font family here is sans-serif, not Helveticas or Arial. Accordingly, the basic font family Calibri/Carlito belong to is sans-serif, too. If you need metrical compatibility, original document formatting, etc., you should choose fonts that provide these extra features. Anything that goes behind plain text viewing (better yet: content access as this is exactly what 'viewing a document' was supposed to mean) is considered an extra feature. And believe it or not, this is not my personal categorization. ;-)

Last edited by bohoomil (2015-12-03 03:25:45)

xander · 2016-02-17 18:59:26

Cantarell fonts has been updated to 0.22 in the main Arch repo, will it be updated here? And may be it's time to

bohoomil wrote:

I'm considering switching to the official one some day

Last edited by xander (2016-02-18 13:06:15)

xander · 2017-01-23 17:21:28

Seems that bohoomil's not going back to work on infinality-ultimate and fonts bundle, so here's attempts to keep its perfect project up-to-date:

infinality-ultimate-bundle (freetype2, fontconfig, cairo): https://github.com/archfan/infinality_bundle -- project to synchronize infinality-ultimate patches with the latest upstream source code. Testing and any feedback are appreciated.

infinality-bundle-fonts: https://github.com/solbjorn/fontconfig-ultimate -- today I've forked its pkgbuild branch and have updated some essential and popular fonts to its latest versions. PLEASE report any issues/outdated versions/etc, this is important to keep fonts looking good.

xander · 2017-01-26 18:10:49

Iosevka font was updated to version 1.11.0 (https://github.com/solbjorn/fontconfig-ultimate).
If anyone is interested in this bundle further development, please report about any new fonts releases.

Alad · 2017-01-26 21:43:55

If you read the AUR comments you'll notice those packages are still broken. E.g. harfbuzz doesn't build with those patches. While I don't want to prevent anyone from working on these (indeed, I suggested it over the eternal complaining), it's probably best to talk to freetype upstream to merge remaining features, if any.

Last edited by Alad (2017-01-26 21:45:17)

xander · 2017-01-27 07:43:20

I'm working only on fonts PKGBUILDs. For freetype, fontconfig and cairo please see archfan's repo above. I've built all of three packages two days ago with harfbuzz 1.4.2 and didn't faced any difficulties. I can't remember if I've built infinality packages with harfbuzz 1.4.2 or 1.3.4. If archfan's current versions can't be built with 1.4.2, the best solution is to open a new issue in his repo. Also please notify me about any broken font packages in my fork, and I'll fix it as fast as possible.
Current repo package of Deadbeef, for example, builts correctly, but still not start up due to missing deprecated APIs in new harfbuzz version.

Last edited by xander (2017-01-27 07:45:23)

Arch Linux

#276 2015-08-05 09:43:15

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#277 2015-08-05 18:03:40

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#278 2015-08-06 12:47:23

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#279 2015-08-06 19:03:23

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#280 2015-09-15 20:18:50

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#281 2015-09-16 07:27:00

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#282 2015-09-21 19:19:00

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#283 2015-09-22 05:56:20

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#284 2015-11-25 23:59:08

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#285 2015-11-26 00:35:18

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#286 2015-11-29 04:28:02

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#287 2015-12-01 16:00:08

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#288 2015-12-03 03:22:14

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#289 2016-02-17 18:59:26

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#290 2017-01-23 17:21:28

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#291 2017-01-26 18:10:49

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#292 2017-01-26 21:43:55

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

#293 2017-01-27 07:43:20

Re: infinality-bundle-fonts: a free multilingual font collection for Arch

Board footer