strange situation (bug?) with FC5/6 X.org font packages

[Joe Smith]

I recently encountered a problem with the Type 1 (pfa) Luxi fonts 
distributed with Fedora's X.org xorg-x11-fonts-Type1 packages. My system 
is still FC5, but as far as I can tell the situation still exists with FC6.

The problem is that OpenOffice generates incorrect PDFs in some cases 
when the Luxi fonts are used. This doesn't happen with the Fedora 2.0.2 
OOo, only the latest stable OOo 2.2 from www.openoffice.org. There may 
be an OOo problem, but it only affects these particular fonts, and only 
the Type 1 version, as distributed with Fedora. Other Type 1 fonts seem 
to work fine.

Digging a little further, I find that the Luxi fonts have long been 
available in TrueType format (ttf). Further, the Luxi fonts are 
duplicated (in ttf format) in the Fedora xorg-x11-fonts-truetype 
package. So, if the ttf files are included in the X.org packages, why 
aren't they being used?

Well, it turns out that the directory where the Luxi ttf files are 
installed is not included in the standard fontconfig directory list.

The dirs in /etc/fonts/fonts.conf are:

   /usr/share/fonts
   /usr/share/X11/fonts/Type1
   /usr/share/X11/fonts/OTF
   ~/.fonts

The Luxi Type 1 files are installed in:

   /usr/share/X11/fonts/Type1

The Luxi ttf files are installed in:

   /usr/share/X11/fonts/TTF

If that directory is added to my /etc/fonts/local.conf, then both Type 1 
and ttf formats are available; OOo prefers the ttf version, the PDFs are 
perfect and everybody is happy.

Apparently SuSE Linux provides these fonts in both Type 1 and ttf 
formats, as I found when my original problem with PDF output could not 
be reproduced under SuSE Linux. Fc-list on SuSE lists both, although the 
files are installed in /usr/share/fonts/{Type1,truetype}/

Comments? Suggestions? Should I file a report, or am I missing something 
obvious (again)?

<Joe