Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Liberation Fonts Increase Interoperability For Linux Users

Posted by timothy on from the yes-yes-gnu-slash-linux dept.

hweimer writes "Most problems when opening Word documents under GNU/Linux are due to missing fonts. Therefore, Red Hat published a set of fonts metric-compatible with the Windows core fonts last year. However, there were some concerns regarding the licensing that prevented many other distros to ship them. We finally managed to settle these problems, leading to better document interoperability for all GNU/Linux users."

8 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Re:This is good, but by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Informative

    Computer Modern. It's been better than the default MS stuff for 25 years or so.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. Re:Do I need/want these? by pshuke · · Score: 5, Informative
    Probably not. The appeal with these fonts, as I understand it, is that they can be distributed along with the rest of the operating system. Corefonts have some slight copyright issues. From the licence:


    Reproduction and Distribution. You may reproduce and distribute an unlimited number of copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT; provided that each copy shall be a true and complete copy, including all copyright and trademark notices, and shall be accompanied by a copy of this EULA. Copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be distributed for profit either on a standalone basis or included as part of your own product.

    Note in particular the "Copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be distributed for profit either on a standalone basis or included as part of your own product." part.

  3. Re:Do I need/want these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    corefonts are on dodgy legal ground since microsoft decided they weren't really interested in the improving the internet experience for all people, and their removal of them. If these new fonts are good enough, corefonts will be removed from the distros over time.

  4. Re:Do I need/want these? by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 3, Informative

    FWIW, the copy of those fonts that HP distributed with some versions of HPUX 11.11 did not have that same EULA.

    The version of that paragraph included in the README file of /usr/lib/X11/fonts/ms.st/typefaces/README says:

    Reproduction and Distribution. You may reproduce and distribute
    an unlimited number of copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT; provided
    that each copy shall be a true and complete copy, including all
    copyright and trademark notices, and shall be accompanied by a
    copy of this EULA. Copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may be
    distributed as a standalone product or included with your own
    product. Copies of the SOFTWARE PRODUCT may not be sold or
    distributed for any kind of fee. The difference being that the version of this EULA says you can include them "with your own product" which appears to mean you can charge a fee for your product and include the fonts "for free." It sure seems like that's what HP actually did given that they came with the copy of HPUX that they did charge a fee for.
  5. And similar enough to be a good substitute by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Like Arial is rather similar to Helvetica. Some people claim that Microsoft did this to avoid paying royalties, see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arial#Criticism.2FSimilar_fonts.
    Now this may be true or not, but after they almost copied Helvetica with Arial, turnabout's fair play.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  6. Re:This is good, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Gentium. It's released under the Open Font License, which I believe is "free" (by the FSF's definition).

    It was also designed with many extended Latin characters, allowing ethnic groups across the world to produce documents typeset in Gentium. (I mean, just look at all these diacritics!)

    Say what you want about the organization that produced these (SIL International), but this is a good-looking, high-quality typeface, which fits your criteria perfectly.

  7. Re:This is good, but by westlake · · Score: 3, Informative
    What is really needed to help Linux stand out is a set of F/LOSS-licensed fonts that are of even better quality than the default MS stuff--I mean it's essential to be able to show Times New Roman correctly, but what would make Linux...stand out is a selection of superb fonts.

    Times New Roman was introduced in 1932. Baskerville in 1757.

    Type design at the highest level is an extraordinarily rare art and craft.

    Assuming you have that problem solved, how do limit their distribution of your new font set to the "free" operating systems - without having the pragmatists and the ideologues of F/OSS coming at you with pitchforks from every side?

    Linux has about a 0.68% share of the desktop. Sun with OpenOffice.org and the Mozilla Foundation with Firefox have set their sights a little higher.

  8. Re:I fixed it for you by deniable · · Score: 4, Informative

    We had Word documents get so screwed up that Word wouldn't open them. The best fix was to open them in OpenOffice and re-save them. It messed up the formatting, but it was better than losing a days work. I keep it around as a repair tool even in an all MS shop.

    If you think Word is evil, stay away from Publisher.