Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 22:34:35 +0100
> From: lf...@cruziero.com (akhiezer)
>
> > From: rhubarbpie...@gmail.com
> > Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:41:24 -0500
> [...]
> >
> > This problem returned in BLFS 8.0 but with a twist as neither method I
> > used in 7.10 works. But deleting/renaming
> > /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf plus adding the following to
> > /etc/profile works:
> >
> > export FREETYPE_PROPERTIES="truetype:interpreter-version=35
> > cff:no-stem-darkening=1 autofitter:warping=1"
> >
> > The above works only without /etc/fonts/local.conf.
> >
> > Again, this is not a BLFS problem. It may be a freetype problem as the
> > freetype version changed between 7.10 and 8.0. It's posslble the
> > interpreter line added to /etc/profile will be unnecessary with the next
> > version. I hope.
> >
> > I'm probably in the minority but I greatly prefer the lighter, crisper,
> > pre-10-hinting-slight.conf fonts. There may be other ways to achieve
> > them but the above method works well on my box.
> >
>
>
> Not sure if this is covered ~implicitly in the followups from you/Mike
- ah, yeah, looks like it's essentially covered in:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/freetype/files/freetype2/2.7/
"... IMPORTANT CHANGES ..."
> to orig msg above - but anyhow, in case it sheds any addl light: just
> saw today:
>
> http://www.slackware.com/changelog/current.php?cpu=x86_64
>
> Current (pre-release) ChangeLog for x86_64
>
> Wed Apr 26 23:09:45 UTC 2017
> [...]
> l/freetype-2.7.1-x86_64-1.txz: Upgraded.
>Subpixel hinting has been enabled upstream by default, but you
>may adjust this in /etc/profile.d/freetype.{csh,sh}.
>
>
>
> And it's 2.7.1 freetye that's in blfs-8.0 and not in blfs-7.10 :
>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/7.10/
> FreeType-2.6.5
> Fontconfig-2.12.1
> ==
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/8.0/
> FreeType-2.7.1
> Fontconfig-2.12.1
>
>
akh
--
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
> From: rhubarbpie...@gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:41:24 -0500
[...]
>
> This problem returned in BLFS 8.0 but with a twist as neither method I
> used in 7.10 works. But deleting/renaming
> /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf plus adding the following to
> /etc/profile works:
>
> export FREETYPE_PROPERTIES="truetype:interpreter-version=35
> cff:no-stem-darkening=1 autofitter:warping=1"
>
> The above works only without /etc/fonts/local.conf.
>
> Again, this is not a BLFS problem. It may be a freetype problem as the
> freetype version changed between 7.10 and 8.0. It's posslble the
> interpreter line added to /etc/profile will be unnecessary with the next
> version. I hope.
>
> I'm probably in the minority but I greatly prefer the lighter, crisper,
> pre-10-hinting-slight.conf fonts. There may be other ways to achieve
> them but the above method works well on my box.
>
Not sure if this is covered ~implicitly in the followups from you/Mike
to orig msg above - but anyhow, in case it sheds any addl light: just
saw today:
http://www.slackware.com/changelog/current.php?cpu=x86_64
Current (pre-release) ChangeLog for x86_64
Wed Apr 26 23:09:45 UTC 2017
[...]
l/freetype-2.7.1-x86_64-1.txz: Upgraded.
Subpixel hinting has been enabled upstream by default, but you
may adjust this in /etc/profile.d/freetype.{csh,sh}.
And it's 2.7.1 freetye that's in blfs-8.0 and not in blfs-7.10 :
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/7.10/
FreeType-2.6.5
Fontconfig-2.12.1
==
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/8.0/
FreeType-2.7.1
Fontconfig-2.12.1
akh
--
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 12:39:26 -0500 rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > However, the gist of the post was correct. Yep, for the record in case someone ever runs into this, at least on your system, freetype will yield a lighter font iff: (1) hintfull is being used *and* (2) version 35 of the freetype truetype interpreter is being used. And, of course, what fontconfig uses by default varies by version. With recent versions of freetype, we can now control which version of the truetype interpreter freetype uses via an environment variable: FREETYPE_PROPERTIES="truetype:interpreter-version=35 cff:no-stem-darkening=1 autofitter:warping=1" We can see what hinting settings are in effect via: fc-match '' hinting hintstyle autohint hintstyle 0=hintnone, 1=hintslight, 2=hintmedium, 3=hintfull I for one would like to be able to tune the heaviness of the rendered fonts. As I understand it, the "Infinality" patches allow for such control: export INFINALITY_FT_GAMMA_CORRECTION="0 100" export INFINALITY_FT_BRIGHTNESS="0" export INFINALITY_FT_CONTRAST="0" However, these Infinality features have not yet made it into fontconfig/freetype mainstream yet. Cheers, Mike -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
I have a correction to my 04/07/17 post. /etc/fonts/local.conf with hintstyle set to hintfull can exist. In fact, on my box it must exist for crisper fonts if /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf is present. However, the gist of the post was correct. On my box, with or without 10-hinting-slight.conf, $FREETYPE_PROPERTIES must be set, which was unnecessary with the 7.10 freetype version. There may be different methods, but for me it's easiest to simply rename 10-hinting-slight.conf and set $FREETYPE_PROPERTIES without a local.conf file. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
This problem returned in BLFS 8.0 but with a twist as neither method I used in 7.10 works. But deleting/renaming /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf plus adding the following to /etc/profile works: export FREETYPE_PROPERTIES="truetype:interpreter-version=35 cff:no-stem-darkening=1 autofitter:warping=1" The above works only without /etc/fonts/local.conf. Again, this is not a BLFS problem. It may be a freetype problem as the freetype version changed between 7.10 and 8.0. It's posslble the interpreter line added to /etc/profile will be unnecessary with the next version. I hope. I'm probably in the minority but I greatly prefer the lighter, crisper, pre-10-hinting-slight.conf fonts. There may be other ways to achieve them but the above method works well on my box. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9
I found simply deleting or renaming /etc/fonts/conf.d/10-hinting-slight.conf restores the less bold fonts I had in BLFS 7.9. I believe another solution is to use the following code in /etc/fonts/local.conf: true hintfull false This is not a BLFS problem and probably not a fontconfig-2.12.1 problem. But I prefer the clearer, less bold fonts of fontconfig-2.11.1. There may be other ways but if this helps someone who also prefers the previous fonts - great. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
True, a quick diff didn't highlight that. My 7.10 desktop is powered off at the moment, and those symlinks actually point to /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail in my case - I looked at my first-stage backups, in /staging on my server, but of course the links are broken when I do that. A (very) quick look yesterday suggested the symlinks on my 7.9 and 7.10 were the same, but I won't swear that they are (more than a screenful using ls -l). But - assuming all the 10-hinting* symlinks are present, the contents of those files DID change between BLFS-7.9 and 7.10. ĸen The difference in /etc/fonts/conf.d between 7.9 and 7.10 builds on my box is 10-hinting-slight.conf. 7.10 includes it but 7.9 does not. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 04:01:15PM -0400, Michael Shell wrote: > On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 01:41:18 +0100 > Ken Moffat wrote: > > > I've just had the opportunity to compare /etc/fonts/fonts.conf in > > 7.9 and 7.10. Yes, they do differ in size by about 3.5K. The > > reason is that the table of valid blank characters almost at the end > > of the file has been removed. > . > . > > I'm puzzled why the absence of that table would alter things for an > > English speaker running LFS ... > > > Ken, > > Watch out - both those config files load all the links in > /etc/fonts/conf.d: > > > conf.d > > So, we've also got to compare the list of the links in /etc/fonts/conf.d as > well as what is in (or just the sizes) the config files those links are > pointing to /etc/fonts/conf.avail > > This is likely where the difference resides. > > > Cheers, > > Mike > True, a quick diff didn't highlight that. My 7.10 desktop is powered off at the moment, and those symlinks actually point to /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail in my case - I looked at my first-stage backups, in /staging on my server, but of course the links are broken when I do that. A (very) quick look yesterday suggested the symlinks on my 7.9 and 7.10 were the same, but I won't swear that they are (more than a screenful using ls -l). But - assuming all the 10-hinting* symlinks are present, the contents of those files DID change between BLFS-7.9 and 7.10. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 01:41:18 +0100 Ken Moffat wrote: > I've just had the opportunity to compare /etc/fonts/fonts.conf in > 7.9 and 7.10. Yes, they do differ in size by about 3.5K. The > reason is that the table of valid blank characters almost at the end > of the file has been removed. . . > I'm puzzled why the absence of that table would alter things for an > English speaker running LFS ... Ken, Watch out - both those config files load all the links in /etc/fonts/conf.d: conf.d So, we've also got to compare the list of the links in /etc/fonts/conf.d as well as what is in (or just the sizes) the config files those links are pointing to /etc/fonts/conf.avail This is likely where the difference resides. Cheers, Mike -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On 09/23/2016 07:41 PM, Ken Moffat wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:26:02PM -0500, rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: I thought fontconfig creates /etc/fonts/fonts.conf and the files differ between 7.9 and 7.10. In fact they differ significantly in size. It seems compiling fontconfig is pretty straightforward but I guess there could have been an error I missed. Replacing my BadFonts_7.10 /etc/fonts with my 7.9 version does fix the problem. I've just had the opportunity to compare /etc/fonts/fonts.conf in 7.9 and 7.10. Yes, they do differ in size by about 3.5K. The reason is that the table of valid blank characters almost at the end of the file has been removed. Previously I came across a reference to this table in the context (some years and versions ago) of one of the Source Sans fonts being treated by fontconfig as not usable for English (in that case, I think it was missing both the caret and the back-tick, which I interpreted to mean they were ostensibly present, but blank). I'm puzzled why the absence of that table would alter things for an English speaker running LFS - unless you are trying to use some uncommon font (e.g. in your browser's preferences, if the browser is where you noticed this) which used to be ignored because some other characters were blank, but is now in use. But diagnosing what happens in fontconfig seems to be painful. The link I found was, I think, in https://eev.ee/blog/2015/05/20/i-stared-into-the-fontconfig-and-the-fontconfig-stared-back-at-me/ which also talks of using fc-match and pango-view to see which font will be used for a particular codepoint, based on the font name you pass and what is installed. Unfortunately, I think the examples used a smiley or other graphic character. But perhaps the process may be useful if you have both the 7.9 and 7.10 systems available. ĸen Thank you, your confirmation is helpful. I probably should have been specific in the change in size (7.9/5464 / 7.10/2306) but assumed it was simply due to an error on my part. I have nothing but serif, sans-serif, or monospace in my browser preferences. I first noticed the font difference in my Fluxbox menu. That's what I've used as a reference when testing. I still assume the problem is something I've done wrong in compiling X but just don't see it. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:26:02PM -0500, rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > > I thought fontconfig creates /etc/fonts/fonts.conf and the files differ > between 7.9 and 7.10. In fact they differ significantly in size. It seems > compiling fontconfig is pretty straightforward but I guess there could have > been an error I missed. Replacing my BadFonts_7.10 /etc/fonts with my 7.9 > version does fix the problem. > I've just had the opportunity to compare /etc/fonts/fonts.conf in 7.9 and 7.10. Yes, they do differ in size by about 3.5K. The reason is that the table of valid blank characters almost at the end of the file has been removed. Previously I came across a reference to this table in the context (some years and versions ago) of one of the Source Sans fonts being treated by fontconfig as not usable for English (in that case, I think it was missing both the caret and the back-tick, which I interpreted to mean they were ostensibly present, but blank). I'm puzzled why the absence of that table would alter things for an English speaker running LFS - unless you are trying to use some uncommon font (e.g. in your browser's preferences, if the browser is where you noticed this) which used to be ignored because some other characters were blank, but is now in use. But diagnosing what happens in fontconfig seems to be painful. The link I found was, I think, in https://eev.ee/blog/2015/05/20/i-stared-into-the-fontconfig-and-the-fontconfig-stared-back-at-me/ which also talks of using fc-match and pango-view to see which font will be used for a particular codepoint, based on the font name you pass and what is installed. Unfortunately, I think the examples used a smiley or other graphic character. But perhaps the process may be useful if you have both the 7.9 and 7.10 systems available. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:26:02 -0500 rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > I don't understand how to get the freetype version, I see only > freetype-config as the installed freetype program. That one can reveal it with the proper chant: freetype-config --ftversion > fontconfig-2.11.1 fontconfig-2.12.1 There have been a lot of changes from 2.11.1 to 2.12.1 as that span includes the 2.11.9x series: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/fontconfig/release/ However, from a brief glance over the change logs I don't see any big changes with regard to the default configuration settings. > Would an error with freetype affect fontconfig? My guess is that a run problem/bug with freetype would not affect the default configuration of fontconfig as long as the former is actually installed/detected. If you get a chance, could you post (or if you prefer, email to me) your fonts.conf for 7.9 as well as that of 7.10. Cheers, Mike -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On 09/21/2016 09:09 PM, Michael Shell wrote: On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:30:57 -0500 rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: antialias - Changing the antialias setting from 'true' to 'false' helped significantly. The fonts are just a touch 'blotchy' but the bold problem is eliminated. However, if I change /etc/fonts/local.conf to include only an antialias setting the fonts are acceptable. I'm surprised that a change in fontconfig is causing this. Most of the time problems in this regard are caused by changes in freetype: https://www.freetype.org/ Mote the changes they are doing all the time (e.g., 2.6.5 versus 2.7). I've encountered a lot of freetype woes like what you are seeing over the years. Do you see any differences in /etc/fonts/fonts.conf, which is the system default, for fontconfig? Are you running any of the /etc/fonts/conf.d stuff in your startup files? You can try creating copies of the fontconfig files: cp -a /etc/fonts /etc/fonts-blfs7.9 or cp -a /etc/fonts /etc/fonts-blfs7.10 and then overwriting a 7.10 /etc/fonts with that of 7.9 and see if that corrects the problem with everything else being the same. If so, then fontconfig did indeed change some of its defaults. What are the two different versions of fontconfig you are using under 7.9 and 7.10? Looking at the changelogs: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/fontconfig/release/ The only thing that catches my eye for 2.12.1 https://www.freedesktop.org/software/fontconfig/release/ChangeLog-2.12.1 is at the end: "Add --with-default-hinting to configure" Are you sure that you are not running different versions of freetype as opposed to fontconfig between your 7.9 and 7.10 systems? Cheers and thanks, Mike I can't disagree with your logic. I first suspected fontconfig as I deleted /etc/fonts/fonts.conf while wildly troubleshooting prior to posting and noticed the bold problem disappeared. Unfortunately, deleting that causes other problems. I thought fontconfig creates /etc/fonts/fonts.conf and the files differ between 7.9 and 7.10. In fact they differ significantly in size. It seems compiling fontconfig is pretty straightforward but I guess there could have been an error I missed. Replacing my BadFonts_7.10 /etc/fonts with my 7.9 version does fix the problem. I also suspected freetype, but using the old fontconfig worked. I don't understand how to get the freetype version, I see only freetype-config as the installed freetype program. But if I understand your question, the versions for freetype and fontconfig in my 7.9, BadFonts7.9, and GoodFonts7.9 are: 7.9BadFonts_7.10 GoodFonts_7.10 - --- - freetype-config 18.3.12freetype-config 18.5.12freetype-config 18.5.12 fontconfig 2.11.1fontconfig 2.12.1fontconfig 2.11.1 I've not kept my 7.9 tarballs, but believe I used Freetype 2.63 and Freetype 2.65 with BLFS 7.10. So, yes, I'm using different freetype versions between 7.9 and 7.10. But I'm using the same Freetype between the good and bad fonts versions of 7.10. I should probably clarify one thing. While my spartan /etc/fonts/local.conf with only an antialias setting fixes the bold problem, my fonts with that fix are very slightly less clear than with my older fontconfig solution. From checking your suggestions, the question to me is why my /etc/fonts/font.conf files differ so wildly between 7.9 and 7.10. I'll redo X tonight with special attention to my freetype and fontconfig compilations. I must have made an error in one or both. Would an error with freetype affect fontconfig? -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:30:57 -0500 rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > antialias - Changing the antialias setting from 'true' to 'false' helped > significantly. The fonts are just a touch 'blotchy' but the bold > problem is eliminated. However, if I change /etc/fonts/local.conf to > include only an antialias setting the fonts are acceptable. I'm surprised that a change in fontconfig is causing this. Most of the time problems in this regard are caused by changes in freetype: https://www.freetype.org/ Mote the changes they are doing all the time (e.g., 2.6.5 versus 2.7). I've encountered a lot of freetype woes like what you are seeing over the years. Do you see any differences in /etc/fonts/fonts.conf, which is the system default, for fontconfig? Are you running any of the /etc/fonts/conf.d stuff in your startup files? You can try creating copies of the fontconfig files: cp -a /etc/fonts /etc/fonts-blfs7.9 or cp -a /etc/fonts /etc/fonts-blfs7.10 and then overwriting a 7.10 /etc/fonts with that of 7.9 and see if that corrects the problem with everything else being the same. If so, then fontconfig did indeed change some of its defaults. What are the two different versions of fontconfig you are using under 7.9 and 7.10? Looking at the changelogs: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/fontconfig/release/ The only thing that catches my eye for 2.12.1 https://www.freedesktop.org/software/fontconfig/release/ChangeLog-2.12.1 is at the end: "Add --with-default-hinting to configure" Are you sure that you are not running different versions of freetype as opposed to fontconfig between your 7.9 and 7.10 systems? Cheers and thanks, Mike -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 04:30:57PM -0500, rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > > > For the lcdfilter, try lcdlight or lcdnone in place of lcddefault and see > > what happens. > > > > Please do let us know if you learn anything in this regard because > > in the future others will probably run into the same problem. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mike Shell > I admire your dedication to this and your concern to help those in the > future. My abilities are perhaps somewhat limited, but this is what I've > found. > Thanks for your comments. On my development machine (with 7.10) I played around with a few settings yesterday but found the changes minimal, although I had a feeling that hintfull improved normal text. At the moment I'm on another machine, running 7.9 (I've got far too many fonts available, I want to finish working out which, if any, of the TTF or OTF fonts in texlive-2016 are useful to me). On this machine, I already had a fonts.conf : · rgba was set to none · hinting was set to true · hintstyle was set to hintmedium · antialias was enabled I've played with turning rgba to rgb, but again it didn't seem to make any obvious difference. I then disabled antialias and changed to hintfull. On my own example page (with a light blue background) that possibly improved things. But then I went to a page of the book to fix the problem you noted - the font (Liberation Sans 16pt, according to firefox's preferences) was very grey and indistinct. Restoring antialias has made it less grey, so more readable. Now I'm looking at the hint options, and for grey text on a white background it appears that no hinting is better (technically I'm using hintnone for the hintstyle. BUT: turning off antialias again made it almost unreadable, so I've re-enabled that. And I'm getting fed up using killall -HUP firefox (followed by starting it again) to see the changes, so I'll stop. It strikes me that there are a number of unknown variables coming into play here. The two machines I've used share the same monitor, and I haven't altered the monitor's settings (turned down to not burn my eyes out, and to maximise the range of grey shades in photos) but perhaps there are also other factors involved (apart from our own eyesight differences). Anyway ( if anyone is still reading) I'm intending to make proposals to improve our coverage of TTF and OTF fonts - and providing examples for altering fontconfig turns out to be an important part of that, and one where my knowledge is slim. I'll welcome any insights. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
For the lcdfilter, try lcdlight or lcdnone in place of lcddefault and see what happens. Please do let us know if you learn anything in this regard because in the future others will probably run into the same problem. Cheers, Mike Shell I admire your dedication to this and your concern to help those in the future. My abilities are perhaps somewhat limited, but this is what I've found. lcdfilter - Changing lcdfilter to lcdlight or lcdnone had no effect. antialias - Changing the antialias setting from 'true' to 'false' helped significantly. The fonts are just a touch 'blotchy' but the bold problem is eliminated. However, if I change /etc/fonts/local.conf to include only an antialias setting the fonts are acceptable. /usr/share/fonts false My guess is my preference in fonts is less sophisticated than most, but I do like things simple. It's good to know that if the next version of fontconfig again gives me excessive bold I can fix the problem with a simple /etc/fonts/local.conf. I'll probably run with the old fontconfig and see what happens with the next release. If there's something further you'd like me to test I'd be happy to do so. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 06:56:24 -0500 rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > Perhaps things differ by box, but your file accentuates what I got with > the standard 7.10 fontconfig. It produces fonts bolder than I like. > ... It's good to know I can fight back should the problem worsen with > future versions of fontconfig. In the past, the too-bold-fonts problem has generally been caused by the autohinter: http://lifehacker.com/5693492/disable-auto-hinting-to-fix-windows-fonts-in-linux but autohinting was disabled in my config. If you get a chance to investigate, you can delete the various sections in my config file one at a time until the problem is affected - that will reveal what has changed. Hinting and autohinting are the prime suspects. However, in your case, because my hintless config exhibits the problem, I suspect the problem area is with lcdfilter. For a great overview of font options, see https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/font_configuration For the lcdfilter, try lcdlight or lcdnone in place of lcddefault and see what happens. Please do let us know if you learn anything in this regard because in the future others will probably run into the same problem. Cheers, Mike Shell -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On 09/19/2016 02:53 PM, Michael Shell wrote: On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:29:19 +0100 Ken Moffat wrote: The internet has a plethora of suggestions for tweaking what happens in fontconfig. The quality of on-screen font rendering under Linux has long irked me. It seems that after I finally get things the way I like, some upgrade to Freetype or GTK comes along that breaks something. There have been some really bad releases of Freetype in the past, IMHO. Anyway, below is my /etc/fonts/local.conf receipe (I'm running Freetype 2.6.3 with Fontconfig-2.11.1) that I like best on my system (so far). Note that I am unusual in that I use the venerable Type 1 Nimbus fonts for default on screen rendering. Try my font config, rhubarb pie guy, and let us know if you like it or if it helps at all. Be sure and adjust the paths for your case as needed. Cheers, Mike Shell Thank you for responding and I appreciate the config.conf. Perhaps things differ by box, but your file accentuates what I got with the standard 7.10 fontconfig. It produces fonts bolder than I like. That was the main problem with 7.10 and the new fontconfig; bold became bolder and less crisp. I'll study your file as I've not used /etc/fonts/local.conf. I've not noticed fontconfig messing up my fonts but perhaps it's been less severe than with the 7.10 fontconfig. It's good to know I can fight back should the problem worsen with future versions of fontconfig. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On 09/19/2016 01:29 PM, Ken Moffat wrote: On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 07:56:29AM -0500,rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: I've run BLFS 7.10 for several days and noticed less clear fonts than with 7.9. I reinstalled from square one without success and don't see my error. As a test, I reinstalled BLFS 7.10, but with BLFS 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig packages (dejavu-fonts-ttf-2.35 and fontconfig-2.11.1) and my fonts are fine. So I have a workable solution, but my fix is a workaround. I've kept my bad fonts 7.10 build. How can I pinpoint the problem? I should mention my BLFS 7.10 fonts weren't terrible, but definitely less clear. And again, my only deviation from the BLFS 7.10 documentation was using 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig packages. It appears the procedures to compile each are unchanged from 7.9. Probably fontconfig. I find it hard to believe that a font package would be altered in a way which made it less clear. The usual changes to fonts are changing the shape of one or two glyphs, or adding a few extra glyphs. As a temporary step, you could try installing the newer version of the font, but keeping the old fontconfig, to test if fontconfig is indeed the cause of the problem. The internet has a plethora of suggestions for tweaking what happens in fontconfig. Many of those suggestions are for preferring one font to another, or for preferring japanese to chinese, but some are related to (anti-)aliasing, hinting, etc. I recall reading some comments where people preferred to turn off ant-aliasing for some fonts, but I don't recall the why or the how. I suspect that the best setting is specific to the person and the monitor. Google for font_configuration in the Arch wiki, and look at the Subpixel rendering (to be honest, the external link for testing what sort of RGB seems to make minimal difference to me), and perhaps Hintstyle and LCD Filter. ĸen You're correct, the new dejavu with the old fontconfig works. I tried that on my original "bad fonts" BLFS 7.10 build in that I first attempted just compiling the old fontconfig. I assumed the old fontconfig would overwrite the new version but it had no effect on my fonts. I didn't/don't understand why so I decided to bite the bullet and build X from square one as a test. As I knew the old dejavu and fontconfig worked well in 7.9 so I chose what I considered the safe choice. It's reassuring this probably isn't something I messed up but was unaware fontconfig is such a moving target. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:29:19 +0100 Ken Moffat wrote: > The internet has a plethora of suggestions for tweaking what happens > in fontconfig. The quality of on-screen font rendering under Linux has long irked me. It seems that after I finally get things the way I like, some upgrade to Freetype or GTK comes along that breaks something. There have been some really bad releases of Freetype in the past, IMHO. Anyway, below is my /etc/fonts/local.conf receipe (I'm running Freetype 2.6.3 with Fontconfig-2.11.1) that I like best on my system (so far). Note that I am unusual in that I use the venerable Type 1 Nimbus fonts for default on screen rendering. Try my font config, rhubarb pie guy, and let us know if you like it or if it helps at all. Be sure and adjust the paths for your case as needed. Cheers, Mike Shell /usr/share/fonts /usr/X11/share/fonts/X11/Type1 false false Helvetica sans-serif true none false hintnone false lcddefault 112 # preferred/default serif, sans and monospace fonts # use # fc-match --verbose sans-serif # to check what is actually use for the given request serif Nimbus Roman No9 L sans-serif Nimbus Sans L monospace Nimbus Mono L http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 07:56:29AM -0500, rhubarbpie...@gmail.com wrote: > > I've run BLFS 7.10 for several days and noticed less clear fonts than with > 7.9. I reinstalled from square one without success and don't see my error. > > As a test, I reinstalled BLFS 7.10, but with BLFS 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig > packages (dejavu-fonts-ttf-2.35 and fontconfig-2.11.1) and my fonts are > fine. So I have a workable solution, but my fix is a workaround. I've kept > my bad fonts 7.10 build. How can I pinpoint the problem? > > I should mention my BLFS 7.10 fonts weren't terrible, but definitely less > clear. And again, my only deviation from the BLFS 7.10 documentation was > using 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig packages. It appears the procedures to > compile each are unchanged from 7.9. Probably fontconfig. I find it hard to believe that a font package would be altered in a way which made it less clear. The usual changes to fonts are changing the shape of one or two glyphs, or adding a few extra glyphs. As a temporary step, you could try installing the newer version of the font, but keeping the old fontconfig, to test if fontconfig is indeed the cause of the problem. The internet has a plethora of suggestions for tweaking what happens in fontconfig. Many of those suggestions are for preferring one font to another, or for preferring japanese to chinese, but some are related to (anti-)aliasing, hinting, etc. I recall reading some comments where people preferred to turn off ant-aliasing for some fonts, but I don't recall the why or the how. I suspect that the best setting is specific to the person and the monitor. Google for font_configuration in the Arch wiki, and look at the Subpixel rendering (to be honest, the external link for testing what sort of RGB seems to make minimal difference to me), and perhaps Hintstyle and LCD Filter. ĸen -- `I shall take my mountains', said Lu-Tze. `The climate will be good for them.' -- Small Gods -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-support] BLFS 7.10 fonts less clear than in 7.9.
I've run BLFS 7.10 for several days and noticed less clear fonts than with 7.9. I reinstalled from square one without success and don't see my error. As a test, I reinstalled BLFS 7.10, but with BLFS 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig packages (dejavu-fonts-ttf-2.35 and fontconfig-2.11.1) and my fonts are fine. So I have a workable solution, but my fix is a workaround. I've kept my bad fonts 7.10 build. How can I pinpoint the problem? I should mention my BLFS 7.10 fonts weren't terrible, but definitely less clear. And again, my only deviation from the BLFS 7.10 documentation was using 7.9 dejavu and fontconfig packages. It appears the procedures to compile each are unchanged from 7.9. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
