wine font changes system look and feel

Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierfert at
Tue Jun 5 14:57:50 UTC 2012

On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 11:49 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le Mar 5 juin 2012 10:59, Kamil Paral a écrit :
> > If you are afraid there might be people out there who want wine-Tahoma as a
> > system font, it is important to realize that those people are probably just a
> > tiny fraction of the other side of the argument
> That's a dangerous argument, looks are subjective and every time someone
> touches a font it deems ugly others disagree.

That is exactly how I see this. On a side note: I personally have the
package installed and don't find e. g. facebook particularly ugly or

> It'd be much better if
> 1. the wine font didn't declare a name too heavy for it

I am no font expert but from my understanding it does not. Its name is
WineTahoma (and WineTahomaBold respectively). Both fonts declare them to
be part of the Tahoma family. From my understanding this is perfectly
alright as they share some of the defining features of the MS Tahoma
font (so maybe the looks differ).

> 2. the font package was made technically optionnal so people who love the font
> (I'm sure there are some like all the other times) can still use it

Well this is the tricky part as I believe them essential for a standard
wine setup. We could of course aim for a dual-solution: Let
wine-tahoma-fonts put the fonts in the wine font dir (mandatory for
wine) and add a wine-tahoma-fonts-system package (names suggestions
welcome) which also puts the fonts in the system wide font path

If this would be a feasible solution I would still like some opinions if
this should be done for both fonts or just for the reported bugs about
the bold version.

Andreas Bierfert <andreas.bierfert at>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the devel mailing list