After reading this message I am replying to myself to clearify ;-)
The URL I paste in was http://www.xfree86.org/current/DESIGN.html which
points to the design document draft in the XFree86 documentation section for
v4.3.0. What I was trying to express to Paul was that this document *very
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 09:13:32 -0600
jkjellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After reading this message I am replying to myself to clearify ;-)
The URL I paste in was http://www.xfree86.org/current/DESIGN.html
which points to the design document draft in the XFree86 documentation
section for
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 12:27:41PM -0500, David Dawes wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 10:41:50AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I strongly advocate that you take in account such separation of the
outgoing resolution and the framebuffer size in any future configuration
scheme.
We already
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 07:01:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 12:27:41PM -0500, David Dawes wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 10:41:50AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
I strongly advocate that you take in account such separation of the
outgoing resolution and the framebuffer
Around 23 o'clock on Mar 6, David Dawes wrote:
I'm looking for as many rows as I can get in a given xterm size with a
readable font, so I'd like to get rid of that unused white space. I tried
a few things, and found that setting the font height to ascent + descent
instead of what Xft reports
