GS fluidr3_gs.cfg doesn't even provide support for accordion.

I attached my proposal for packaging what's in Debian (some files may be omitted from installation of course, but I felt it would be right to give some credit to Debian for making all the support files). Users with special needs are likely to know where to find 'specialty' soundfonts, don't you think?

It doesn't seem to be possible to load and merge multiple soundfonts, and if that's confirmed there doesn't seem to be much interest in providing options that aren't very appropriate as a generic choice. Quality is maybe marginally better than the former but certainly not than the latter, and the number of voices is considerably more limited. I looked at it and I don't see any advantage it could have over the original FreePats or the GeneralUser soundfont. Now that we have an example of packaging an SF2 font, the added bonus (once this work gets finished) would be to take a look at FreePats2 again.Have you checked if there's an actual difference? I have assumed that the Debian package maintainers would have picked that up (5 years is long, even for Debian). The original link ( here) contains FluidR3 GM2-2.SF2 from 2013 rather than FluidR3_GM.sf2 and FluidR3_GS.sf2 from 2008, but I would ignore that fact and simply take things from Debian.Maybe let's first try to assess how often this evolves? I guess that we should be able to come up with a livecheck for .But I'm not sure and I don't have any better idea. Fedora recommends using $ justified? I would kind of expect fluidsynth's documentation there and if the two projects are unrelated this might not be the most appropriate path.

Less annoying if we take them directly though. In particular I would prefer to provide fluidr3_gm.cfg and fluidr3_gs.cfg as a separate standalone file rather than a patch, but all other files are annoying as well and people would get temptation to modify them.Else let's just fetch the patch from Debian directly rather than including it as a whole in our MP repo. Where did you get the patch from? From Debian? I super hate the form it has at the moment and would be much happier if we would split it.If you take all the patches from Debian, we could keep the naming somewhat consistent. I would (slightly?) prefer fluid-soundfont-gm and fluid-soundfont-gs. The names are confusing enough already.They have different descriptions, different master sites, different everything. I don't see any reason to keep the two sound fonts as subports of fluidsynth.

Fluid gm sf2