On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 03:40:12PM -0700, Tom wrote: > > Well, then, I'll stick with the decision I made six months ago: > the autohinter looks worse than the bytecode interpreter. > > You know, this is the first slipup in the Matrix I've experienced > since I switch to Linux.
They've happened, you just didn't notice. > (I hope you get that: 9 months ago I was > a MS-employee. I mean to say: taboo subject about which we are > embaressed so we'll pretend it isn't worth discussing... > Less than complete intellectual forthrightness... Patent issue > we cannot overcome...) > > Not that it's a big deal, just find the arbitriness curious... > Everything else is rational. I think it's more that nobody has any strong views on the subject. I didn't even know fontconfig existed until I read this. I find it's installed, but I've never knowingly used it, even though I seem to have 97 packages that depend on it. You might find it profitable to experiment with fontconfig until you find a configuration that produces behaviour that differs between emacs and vi. You can then start a thread on that subject which will attract many responses, from which you should be able to select one that you can steer in the direction of discussing your real issue. :-) -- Pigeon Be kind to pigeons Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21C61F7F
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
