Created attachment 191066 [details] chromium-noto.diff Can we make the x11-fonts/noto run dependency optional? Chromium seems to work fine without it AFAICT and noto is a very large package (~ 770 MiB) that takes up valuable package server space which I'd like to avoid if possible. Thank you!
The noto package is 1.2 gb extracted, most of which is the CJK fonts. If you exclude the CJK fonts, it only installs 25mb of data. Perhaps we could split noto and put the CJK fonts into a different package and make that optional?
(In reply to Steve Wills from comment #1) Like x11-fonts/noto-lite ?
noto-lite conflicts with noto which is a dependency of at least 2 other ports. Arch's chromium package requires ttf-font which is provided (among others) by noto-fonts, ttf-dejavu and ttf-liberation packages. Maybe it would make sense for www/chromium to provide a choice of a font too, e.g. noto/dejavu and liberation as a minimally usable option (3mb).
(In reply to Dmitri Goutnik from comment #3) I like this approach as long others agree :) http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/x/TTF-and-OTF-fonts.html
(In reply to Steve Wills from comment #1) It seems reasonable to split the port because Noto Sans CJK and Noto Serif CJK only cover Simplified Chinese, Traditional Chinese, Japanese, and Korean languages. https://www.google.com/get/noto/help/cjk/
(In reply to Dmitri Goutnik from comment #3) > Arch's chromium package requires ttf-font which is provided > (among others) by noto-fonts, ttf-dejavu and ttf-liberation packages. On FreeBSD x11-fonts/xorg-fonts-truetype has a similar role given package alternative aren't supported yet. www/chromium already depends on it via x11-toolkits/pango. So, x11-fonts/dejavu is always installed.
I think it's a good idea to split noto into several ports. At least CJK fonts will be a separate port.
Hello, I used to have x11-fonts/noto-lite installed. Now I've just updated www/chromium and I have x11-fonts/noto instead of noto-lite. So, like others people, I would prefer to have only noto-lite on my computer instead of the huge noto package. Is it possible to make chromium depends on "noto OR noto-lite"? Best Regards, Olivier
(In reply to Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh from comment #7) If you don't mind, go ahead :)
noto conflicts with noto-lite used by Plasma5. This means at present we can have Plasma 5 or Chromium, not both. Not so great for a desktop.
(In reply to Mark Dixon from comment #10) OK, then we are going to switch from x11-fonts/noto to x11-fonts/noto-lite.
Created attachment 191269 [details] patch Switch from x11-fonts/noto to x11-fonts/noto-lite
A commit references this bug: Author: cpm Date: Wed Mar 7 21:06:40 UTC 2018 New revision: 463831 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/463831 Log: - Switch from x11-fonts/noto to x11-fonts/noto-lite - Bump PORTREVISION PR: 226255 Reported by: tobik Changes: head/www/chromium/Makefile
(In reply to Carlos J. Puga Medina from comment #11) Thank you!
Please make the noto/noto-lite dependancies selectable. I'm currently using noto for its extensive multilingual support, but with the latest changes it can't be used with chromium.
(In reply to Jonathan Chen from comment #15) The conflict between noto and noto-lite could easily be resolved by installing noto-lite into share/fonts/noto-lite instead of into share/fonts/noto. I see no reason why the conflict exists in the first place.
(In reply to Tobias Kortkamp from comment #16) Yes, it should fix the current conflict. sunpoet@ can help here.
A commit references this bug: Author: cpm Date: Fri Mar 9 17:05:29 UTC 2018 New revision: 463978 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/463978 Log: MFH: r463831 - Switch from x11-fonts/noto to x11-fonts/noto-lite - Bump PORTREVISION PR: 226255 Reported by: tobik Approved by: ports-secteam (riggs) Changes: _U branches/2018Q1/ branches/2018Q1/www/chromium/Makefile