| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
 Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 8:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Thank you very much for that response. I will try looking into some of that. But I have some questions. If I wanted to use the BCI rather than the hinter, or vice versa, what do I need to do to enable/disable one or the other? I have read about the BCI, but I also read that it was enabled in Gentoo, which was not true for Fedora, so maybe that's the problem.
A side note. The fonts were beautiful in Fedora UNTIL I decided (stupidly) to build the X server on my own rather than using a precompiled one. It blew away my nice fonts and I couldn't get them back there either. The thing is, it is the same version of Xorg as what I had before (both were 6.8.2), so it could be some feature in the X server, but that's just speculation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the USE flag "bindist" is present in your /etc/make.conf or if /etc/portage/package.use contains a media-libs/freetype entry that includes bindist, that will cause the freetype autohinter to be used and not the TT BCI (you must emerge freetype of course to realize any changes you make to the USE flags). You can also quickly check by typing "emerge -pv freetype", or "equery uses freetype". If you see -bindist, then its TT BCI. Note that if you want to mess around with the FT autohinter, use the latest version of freetype, not an earlier one, for best results. Do that by unmasking freetype in /etc/portage/package.keywords: "media-libs/freetype ~x86". I use the unmasked freetype in any regard since I prefer the way it renders.
Here's the top section of my /etc/X11/xorg.conf: | Code: | Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/lib/X11/rgb"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/modules"
# uncomment to use xfs font server
FontPath "unix/:-1"
#
# if using xfs font server, all font paths below should be commented out
# except one (e.g. misc:unscaled) in case xfs server is not available.
# these font paths should be added to the xfs config file (/etc/X11/fs/config).
#
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/ttf-bitstream-vera" # also in TTF dir
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/corefonts"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/freefont"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/sharefonts"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/terminus"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/unifont"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc:unscaled" # leave uncommented
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/cyrillic"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/ukr"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/unifont"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/artwiz"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
#FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript"
#FontPath "/usr/local/share/fonts/proggyTTF"
#FontPath "/usr/local/share/fonts/proggy"
#FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/xawtv"
EndSection |
Since I use xfs, I comment out all the FontPaths, save one, in case the xfs server is unavailable. For your testing, I would reverse this: comment out the FontPath unix:-1 and uncomment your FontPaths. I hate to dwell on xfs, but if you do use it, note that you must align your FontPaths properly in its config file, just as you must in the above file if you were not using xfs. The xfs config file is /etc/X11/fs/config and, in my case, looks like this: | Code: |
#
# X Font Server configuration file
#
# allow a max of 4 clients to connect to this font server
client-limit = 4
# no tcp, use sockets!
no-listen = tcp
# when a font server reaches its limit, start up a new one
clone-self = on
# alternate font servers for clients to use
#alternate-servers = foo:7101,bar:7102
# where to look for fonts
catalogue =
/usr/share/fonts/Type1,
/usr/share/fonts/ttf-bitstream-vera,
/usr/share/fonts/TTF,
/usr/share/fonts/corefonts,
/usr/share/fonts/freefont,
/usr/share/fonts/sharefonts,
/usr/share/fonts/terminus,
/usr/share/fonts/unifont,
/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/:unscaled,
/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/:unscaled,
/usr/share/fonts/misc:unscaled,
/usr/share/fonts/cyrillic,
/usr/share/fonts/ukr,
/usr/share/fonts/unifont,
/usr/share/fonts/artwiz,
/usr/share/fonts/misc,
/usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript,
/usr/local/share/fonts/proggyTTF,
/usr/local/share/fonts/proggy,
/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/xawtv
# in 12 points, decipoints
default-point-size = 120
# 100 x 100 and 75 x 75
default-resolutions = 75,75,100,100
# how to log errors
use-syslog = on
# font cache control, specified in KB
#cache-hi-mark = 2048
#cache-low-mark = 1433
#cache-balance = 70 |
I would really suggest bagging xfs for now and devoting time to finding a /etc/fonts/local.conf (or $~/.fonts.conf) that works for you.
Other things to watch out for are your DPI settings. 96 seems to be the de-facto standard (courtesy of Mister Softee), so you can do the following to make sure you've got 96 DPI: create a .xserverrc file in your home directory with something like: | Code: | | exec /usr/bin/X -nolisten tcp -dpi 96 "$@" |
That forces 96 dpi (and incidentally secures your X server by preventing it from listening on a tcp socket for connections). But you must also tell Xft to target 96 dpi as it calls into freetype to render fonts. Do that by added the following line in your .Xresources file (again, in your home directory):
Replicate the Mozilla Firefox suggestions (its user.prefs file) as recommended in the HOWTO/WIKI (assuming you use that browser). And create a *simple* local.conf file in /etc/fonts, also as suggested there. Don't use bindist when you build freetype for starters would be my suggestion....
BTW I've just summarized what took me a long time to research. You should be able to get really nice fonts now.
Good luck.
doc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am going to re-emerge freetype without bindist and also with ~x86 and see if that makes the difference. Since Fedora doesn't have the BCI enabled as I understand, I imagine this is the problem. It might also explain why when I built my own X server on Fedora, that the fonts became ugly.
I found a screenshot that I made back when the fonts were nice. The image below shows the nice fonts at the top and the ugly ones I have now at the bottom. That's just in case anyone can tell what the problem is from the nature of the ugliness of the fonts...
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~feiner/ugly.png |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 3:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
No change 
I did:
| Code: | | # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 USE="-bindist" emerge freetype |
Then completely shut down the X server and kdm and then restarted that. Absolutely nothing changed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I've emerged freetype with -bindist and bindist, one of which said explicitly that the BCI was disabled. It made no difference. I've tried 72 and 96 DPI. I've tried subpixel hinting in all its variations. I've tried changing the normal hinting settings from none all the way up to full. I've turned AA on and off. All of this either results in no change, or variations on levels of ugliness. But none of these settings get me back to where the fonts were when the looked nice. I think it's time to face the fact that the fonts aren't ever going to look nice and I'm just gonna have to put up with the crap or switch back to Fedora, which I might do since at least there, stuff that should work works (despite the other crap and bloatedness). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| widremann wrote: |
I found a screenshot that I made back when the fonts were nice. The image below shows the nice fonts at the top and the ugly ones I have now at the bottom. That's just in case anyone can tell what the problem is from the nature of the ugliness of the fonts...
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~feiner/ugly.png |
I am looking at the image on a CRT not an LCD for clarity. The lower image has the distinct color blurs of sub-pixel rendering. Are you in fact using an LCD monitor or a CRT? Also can you post the output of this command here: | Code: | | emerge -pv xorg-x11 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drphibes wrote: | | widremann wrote: |
I found a screenshot that I made back when the fonts were nice. The image below shows the nice fonts at the top and the ugly ones I have now at the bottom. That's just in case anyone can tell what the problem is from the nature of the ugliness of the fonts...
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~feiner/ugly.png |
I am looking at the image on a CRT not an LCD for clarity. The lower image has the distinct color blurs of sub-pixel rendering. Are you in fact using an LCD monitor or a CRT? Also can you post the output of this command here: | Code: | | emerge -pv xorg-x11 |
|
Here's the output from that command:
| Code: | | [ ebuild R ] x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r1 -3dfx -3dnow +bitmap-fonts -cjk -debug -dlloader -dmx -doc -font-server -hardened -insecure-drivers +ipv6 -minimal -mmx +nls +opengl +pam -sdk -sse -static +truetype-fonts +type1-fonts (-uclibc) -xprint +xv 45,094 kB |
I have turned off subpixel rendering and I believe it was turned off for that screenshot (I'm using LCD, BTW). In any case, it is definitely off now, but now it's actually blurrier (which is closer to what I want since before the letters were too thin). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ih8tgentoo
n00b
Joined: 01 Jan 2003
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Try adding:
<!--
<match target="font">
<test qual="all" name="rgba">
<const>unknown</const>
</test>
<edit name="rgba" mode="assign"><const>rgb</const></edit>
</match>
-->
<match target="font">
<edit name="autohint" mode="assign">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig>
to /etc/fonts/local.conf
This cleaned things up nicely for me. Now fonts look sort of Fedora-ish. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Also please post the "Files" section (with the FontPath directives) of your /etc/X11/xorg.conf; your /etc/fonts/local.conf; your ~/.fonts.conf (if you created one) and ls -l /usr/share/fonts. I see you are no longer using xfs (-font-server) -- good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Relevant Xorg.conf sections:
| Code: | Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/lib/X11/rgb"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/modules"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/:unscaled"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/corefonts/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/freefont/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/sharefonts/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/terminus/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/ttf-bistream-vera/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/unifont/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/CID/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/artwiz"
EndSection |
And ~/.fonts.conf:
| Code: | <?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<fontconfig>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hinting" >
<bool>false</bool>
</edit>
</match>
<match target="font" >
<edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle" >
<const>hintnone</const>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig> |
And /etc/fonts/local.conf:
| Code: | <?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<!-- /etc/fonts/local.conf file for local customizations -->
<fontconfig>
<match target="font">
<edit name="rgba" mode="assign"><const>rgb</const></edit>
</match>
<!--
<match target="font">
<test qual="all" name="rgba">
<const>unknown</const>
</test>
<edit name="rgba" mode="assign"><const>rgb</const></edit>
</match>
-->
<match target="font">
<edit name="autohint" mode="assign">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig> |
And ls -l /usr/share/fonts:
| Code: | drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 65536 May 11 15:51 100dpi
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 65536 May 11 15:51 75dpi
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:51 TTF
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:51 Type1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 13 23:22 artwiz
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 12 06:54 corefonts
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:52 cyrillic
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 May 12 06:57 default
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 May 11 15:51 encodings
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 366 May 13 23:22 fonts.cache-1
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 12 06:57 freefont
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:51 local
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 May 11 15:51 misc
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 12 13:46 msttcorefonts
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 12 07:03 sharefonts
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 13 23:22 terminus
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 12 06:59 ttf-bitstream-vera
drwxrwxr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:52 ukr
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 13 23:22 unifont
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 May 11 15:51 util |
I must admit, however, that after doing a lot of tweaking, the fonts are pretty much there. They are a little blurry in some places, but that's better than the overthin ugly fonts I had before. So at this point, I might just stay put with the font settings unless it will really make a difference. I'll still try a few more though, just in case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry to interupt, but I 'd like to add my $0.02. The quality of fonts is highly dependent on the font type in use. Just look at the following screens:
Luxi Sans
This font seems to be the default one in DE such as KDE. Beware...
Times New Roman
Standard Windows font. Slightly better but not good enough.
Nimbus Sans L
Almost perfect.
Note that I haven't changed any global font-settings, only the font name.
Not sure where your problem lies as I didn't read the whole thread, but you may try changing your fonts unless you've done that already. X-server DPI-setting is also worth looking at. [/url] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| widremann wrote: | Relevant Xorg.conf sections:
| Code: | Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/lib/X11/rgb"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/modules"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/:unscaled"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/corefonts/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/freefont/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/sharefonts/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/terminus/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/ttf-bistream-vera/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/unifont/"
# FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/CID/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/artwiz"
EndSection |
|
You mis-typed "ttf-bitstream-vera" and why did you comment out everything? As it stands here, it's no wonder you have poor fonts on your screen.... Try this arrangement instead: | Code: | Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/lib/X11/rgb"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/ttf-bitstream-vera/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/corefonts/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/freefont/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/sharefonts/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/terminus/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/unifont/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/artwiz"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/"
EndSection
|
Also I think you have to build freetype with the autohinter and not the bci if you want to use the autohinting directive in local.conf. Instead of that, try this /etc/fonts/local.conf:
| Code: | <?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<!-- /etc/fonts/local.conf file for local customizations -->
<fontconfig>
<!-- Antialias: 8=< font-size <=16 -->
<match target="font">
<test qual="any" name="size" compare="more"><double>7.9</double></test>
<test qual="any" name="size" compare="less"><double>15.9</double></test>
<edit name="antialias" mode="assign"><bool>true</bool></edit>
</match>
<!-- Full Hinting for fonts -->
<match target="font">
<edit name="hinting" mode="assign"><bool>true</bool></edit>
<edit name="hintstyle" mode="assign"><const>hintfull</const></edit>
</match>
<!-- Disable sub-pixel rendering -->
<match target="font">
<edit name="rgba" mode="assign"><const>none</const></edit>
</match>
|
Delete your ~/.fonts.conf file in your home directory for now. I'm not advocating full hinting as the final way to go, but you should see a dramatic difference with this config. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That helped with most fonts. The Konsole font is now ugly again, though. I saved the old configuration files, so I could always restore them if I decided I liked it the old way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Glad it helped. I am not using KDE/Qt, but I recall reading that KDE apps don't use Xft2/fontconfig -- there's some sort of Qt font config tool for those apps. See that is where fonts become a pain -- when you have to config them using different tools. Someone else can perhaps mention the name of that tool. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| drphibes wrote: | | Glad it helped. I am not using KDE/Qt, but I recall reading that KDE apps don't use Xft2/fontconfig -- there's some sort of Qt font config tool for those apps. See that is where fonts become a pain -- when you have to config them using different tools. Someone else can perhaps mention the name of that tool. |
You can set the fonts and sizes and anti-aliasing stuff, but changing the Xorg settings does have quite an effect on the KDE fonts.
Moral of the story is that having graphical configuration in ten different places for ten different programs is not the way to go. As much as I hate to praise Windows, having a singular graphical environment is clearly superior to having a disparate array of layered toolkits and window managers running on top of a bloated piece of software designed in the mid-80s. Of course, Windows cheats with putting the GUI in the kernel, but X could still be a whole lot better than it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, Linux can take a level of commitment that some people just aren't interested in pursuing for whatever reason. I wouldn't be so harsh on it though. There are thousands of people actively developing all aspects of it. Personally i find it very useful and I think Bill Gates has quite enough money already. Tried to help you with your fonts and set you down the right road. Seems like you've made up your mind already so good luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drphibes wrote: | | Well, Linux can take a level of commitment that some people just aren't interested in pursuing for whatever reason. I wouldn't be so harsh on it though. There are thousands of people actively developing all aspects of it. Personally i find it very useful and I think Bill Gates has quite enough money already. Tried to help you with your fonts and set you down the right road. Seems like you've made up your mind already so good luck. |
Well, I think you are misinterpreting my frustration. I have no problem with customization and flexibility. That's the main reason I like Linux over Windows. With Windows, the hood is welded shut for the most part. With Linux, everything is open for inspection and modification. But...some things are rather disordered. I don't think having to set fonts in 5 different config files is a feature. Maybe you do, but if so, I would like to know exactly why you think that kind of disorder is a good thing. Of course, my problem really is with X11, not with GNU and Linux nor with most of the rest of the software (I wish portage wasn't broken so much, though). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drphibes
Guru
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't disagree that fonts are difficult in Linux. But so what? You deal with the current complexity as best you can, research, ask for help, experiment and fail a few dozen times and then you realize, finally, you are making progress and learning something. Once you have a decent configuration, you can pretty much move on to other things. It's not like you have to configure fonts everyday. Also LCD monitors makes fonts all the more difficult.
Let's not throw the baby out with bathwater here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lokheed
Veteran
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 1295
Location: /usr/src/linux
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| widremann wrote: |
Well, I think you are misinterpreting my frustration. I have no problem with customization and flexibility. That's the main reason I like Linux over Windows. With Windows, the hood is welded shut for the most part. With Linux, everything is open for inspection and modification. But...some things are rather disordered. I don't think having to set fonts in 5 different config files is a feature. Maybe you do, but if so, I would like to know exactly why you think that kind of disorder is a good thing. Of course, my problem really is with X11, not with GNU and Linux nor with most of the rest of the software (I wish portage wasn't broken so much, though). |
Why dont you stop attacking people long enough to let them help you. You are so closed minded and irrational. How can you make such ignorant judgements about Linux? Yes Windows does somethings very well, superbly even. For all the money they make and all the features they have stolen, its law of averages they would eventually get something right. Then again they do somethings pretty badly too. Linux is very similar, it has it's strong points and it's weak points like every piece of code on this planet.
People forget this is open source, so if you want to help, dig in. If you don't then treat things with a certain humility because the fact is, no one owes you anything. I am getting increasingly involved in various projects and I used to be quite like you (never so crass, but not that far off) and what getting my hands dirty has tought me is there is usually a fix for your problem (unless it's hardware support) but it may be over your head.
What you are experiencing is not normal behaviour. Everyone has glitches and if you want an out of the box distro, go try Ubuntu. Bleeding edge and a great distro to boot. Gentoo is not as user friendly as you may want when you have limited knowledge of the inner workings of Linux. You have to understand that every single person in this thread owes you nothing and would care less if you tucked tail and ran back to Windows. They are helping you out of the good will of their hearts and do so in asking nothing in return...but maybe a little appreciation for their time and effort...and I don't think it's too much to ask.
We all get frustrated and can empathyze with you but nothing will get solved by turning this into a Windows vs. Linux thread.
zieloo, you have illustrated my thoughts on the subject beautifully. Appearance is always in the eye of the beholder. I think all those fonts fall short and Times New Roman is much cleaner and surpasses Nimbus. Here is what I am seeing right now to illustrate that everything is up for grabs when it comes to visual appeal.
Bitstream vera
_________________
You're not afraid of the dark are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lokheed wrote: | | widremann wrote: |
Well, I think you are misinterpreting my frustration. I have no problem with customization and flexibility. That's the main reason I like Linux over Windows. With Windows, the hood is welded shut for the most part. With Linux, everything is open for inspection and modification. But...some things are rather disordered. I don't think having to set fonts in 5 different config files is a feature. Maybe you do, but if so, I would like to know exactly why you think that kind of disorder is a good thing. Of course, my problem really is with X11, not with GNU and Linux nor with most of the rest of the software (I wish portage wasn't broken so much, though). |
Why dont you stop attacking people long enough to let them help you. You are so closed minded and irrational. How can you make such ignorant judgements about Linux? Yes Windows does somethings very well, superbly even. For all the money they make and all the features they have stolen, its law of averages they would eventually get something right. Then again they do somethings pretty badly too. Linux is very similar, it has it's strong points and it's weak points like every piece of code on this planet. |
Are you asking me to pretend like these problems don't exist? Should I just shut up because it offends the fanboys? That's the vibe I'm getting. But X11 does have problems and so does Linux as you have pointed out. I think I am well within my bounds to be frustrated by some bad design choices. BTW, I'm not attacking ANYBODY on this forum, or in the OSS world at large. I'm attacking design issues and misfeatures, which were not intentionaly of course, but shouldn't be ignored either.
| Quote: | | People forget this is open source, so if you want to help, dig in. If you don't then treat things with a certain humility because the fact is, no one owes you anything. I am getting increasingly involved in various projects and I used to be quite like you (never so crass, but not that far off) and what getting my hands dirty has tought me is there is usually a fix for your problem (unless it's hardware support) but it may be over your head. |
So you want me to single-handedly fix the poor design of X11? FWIW, I would like to get involved in OSS projects and I give my advice freely where my limited experience is of help. But the attitude of some people in OSS of "well, either crack open Vi and start editing source code or shut up" is not becoming. I have neither the experience nor the time to redo the font system in X11 and rewrite all the programs that are dependant on the current setup.
| Quote: | | What you are experiencing is not normal behaviour. Everyone has glitches and if you want an out of the box distro, go try Ubuntu. Bleeding edge and a great distro to boot. Gentoo is not as user friendly as you may want when you have limited knowledge of the inner workings of Linux. You have to understand that every single person in this thread owes you nothing and would care less if you tucked tail and ran back to Windows. They are helping you out of the good will of their hearts and do so in asking nothing in return...but maybe a little appreciation for their time and effort...and I don't think it's too much to ask. |
Well, I very much appreciate the help, I really do. My frustration is with X11, so don't get that confused.
When I started the thread, I was very frustrated the fonts were so goddamn ugly. I probably went a little overboard, alas, which I am prone to do. But I thought I was clear that otherwise I still very much like Linux and if I wasn't, then let me reiterate that I still like Linux. I just wish that some things work better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
placeholder
Advocate
Joined: 07 Feb 2004
Posts: 2500
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| widremann wrote: | | Moral of the story is that having graphical configuration in ten different places for ten different programs is not the way to go. As much as I hate to praise Windows, having a singular graphical environment is clearly superior to having a disparate array of layered toolkits and window managers running on top of a bloated piece of software designed in the mid-80s. Of course, Windows cheats with putting the GUI in the kernel, but X could still be a whole lot better than it is. |
Where do people get the idea that X is severely bloated? Games run faster in Linux under it, and things draw faster. Yeah, it used to be bloated and suck a lot more but that is just because XFree hindered the development for a long time. The latest Xorg is hardly anything like the first X protocol that was made back in the 1980s.
Anyway, QT should indeed use XFT AFAIK. It is all about which fonts QT is using, which qt-config can change or the stuff in KDE. Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
widremann
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 1314
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pwnz3r wrote: | | widremann wrote: | | Moral of the story is that having graphical configuration in ten different places for ten different programs is not the way to go. As much as I hate to praise Windows, having a singular graphical environment is clearly superior to having a disparate array of layered toolkits and window managers running on top of a bloated piece of software designed in the mid-80s. Of course, Windows cheats with putting the GUI in the kernel, but X could still be a whole lot better than it is. |
Where do people get the idea that X is severely bloated? Games run faster in Linux under it, and things draw faster. Yeah, it used to be bloated and suck a lot more but that is just because XFree hindered the development for a long time. The latest Xorg is hardly anything like the first X protocol that was made back in the 1980s.
Anyway, QT should indeed use XFT AFAIK. It is all about which fonts QT is using, which qt-config can change or the stuff in KDE. Cheers. |
That hasn't been my experience on either of the machines I have Linux on. On the laptop, X can be downright sluggish just doing normal desktop stop. It's definitely faster in Gentoo than Fedora, but Windows still wins, unfortunately. I can't even play Tux-racer on either machine and Armagetron is at best as fast as on Windows on both machines. My video cards aren't the greatest, but I could play much heavier games under Windows with little trouble or slowdowns.
But now that X.org is doing the development, maybe things will get much better. I know they are working on build modularization, which will be nice and other enhancements. Things are looking up for sure, but it's still, IMHO, a bit messier than it needs to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RijilV
n00b
Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| widremann wrote: | | Once again, I don't have ANY tools to take screenshots. Believe me, if I did, I would. |
so, you don't have the command 'import' ??
| Code: |
import -window root screenshot.png
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lokheed
Veteran
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 1295
Location: /usr/src/linux
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pwnz3r wrote: | | Where do people get the idea that X is severely bloated? |
Because it is. Xeyes, XCalc, Xdm, are but a small slew of otherwise useless programs that should not be included in a base release (with the exception of Xdm perhaps). Even freedesktop has written about the poor code that has been put into X, citing they are still working hard on cleanup. They are just now starting to progress and begin to advance on what Xfree was doing with it. It can be miles better and there is still tons of work to do. It is by far some a streamline, elevated piece of code you make it out to be. Comparing the code to its two decade old predecessor is hardly a comparison at all.
What kind of graphics could you run in the 80's anyway?
_________________
You're not afraid of the dark are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zieloo
Veteran
Joined: 28 Mar 2004
Posts: 1337
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RijilV wrote: | | widremann wrote: | | Once again, I don't have ANY tools to take screenshots. Believe me, if I did, I would. |
so, you don't have the command 'import' ??
| Code: |
import -window root screenshot.png
|
|
He already said, he's going to emerge imagemagick package where it comes from (not everybody has to have it emerged... ).
I agree with Lokheed, X is bloated, no doubt. Saying sth runs faster I consider as a considence only...
btw: Does anyone has a feeling than XFree was faster in window drawing and startup time than xorg is now?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Desktop Environments
