Rawhide updates & Fonts

[Rodd Clarkson]

On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 16:40 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> Mike Chambers wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 16:19 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> > 
> >>Mike Chambers wrote:
> >>
> >>>With a fully updated FC4 + full rawhide updates, are the fonts still as
> >>>messed up as they have been recently, especially in evolution and
> >>>firefox (even with the alpha one?)?
> >>
> >>Describe "messed up."  The only issue I'm aware of exists when using FC4-updates packages, which apparently happens in some occasions (some yum mirror picks up the FC4 update changes before it picks up the rawhide changes?)
> > 
> > 
> > Do the fonts still render diff/not as good with the (cairo?) changes
> > that are taking place?  In other words, do they still not look quite as
> > good from rawhide as the previous Fedora releases?
> 
> Still not as good?  As far as I know, they have always looked fine.  I've not seen any complaints in bugzilla.  Not sure where the idea is coming from that the quality of fonts has been deteriorating.
> 
I'm not sure if anyone filed a bug report.  Some comments were made on
this list (or was it testing) that the fonts were a little 'different'
and indeed some of the fonts were a little blurrier (IMHO).  For
example, the '-' seemed to have a little blur on top of it.

However, Own popped up on the very same list (in responds the the very
same thread) and commented that things were still being tuned and should
improve.

I think it's fair to say that things have improved and that the fonts
look very nice now.  However, this may be because I've grown used to
them now, but I don't think it is (since the '-' doesn't have a little
'growth' on top of it).

Most of the above comments are based on fact, with a little tongue in
cheek thrown in for good measure. ;-]


Rodd
-- 
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
 It's much better on my side"