Hi All,
@Werner Lemberg
Thanks for the info. My next step will be to go through the FontConfig bug
list and source.
@Peter Grandi
Unfortunately (for... ... reasons), it's not an option to change the
font in the application, and the font must render exactly the same,
pixel-perfect.
I ended up
> The specific font I was focussing on is from "LiberationMono-Regular.ttf"
In Ubuntu 20 I have tried ('ftview' is part of 'freetype2-demos')::
ftview 17 /usr/share/fonts/truetype/liberation/LiberationMono-Regular.ttf
and then cycled through various rendering modes with "l" and it
was fairly
> The specific font I was focussing on is from
> "LiberationMono-Regular.ttf" (attached). I don't *think* it contains
> embedded bitmaps?
No, it doesn't.
> The confusing part is, I've used the same file on Ubuntu 8, Ubuntu
> 10 and Ubuntu 16 and it renders correctly on all of them.
It's
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the response.
I can reproduce the issue in OpenSUSE as well. I just sent Werner some
comparison screenshots.
Apologies for the confusing email.
Cheers,
Ben
On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 4:35 PM pg--- via FreeType users <
freetype@nongnu.org> wrote:
> > I'm curious why many
Hi Adam,
The specific font I was focussing on is from "LiberationMono-Regular.ttf"
(attached). I don't *think* it contains embedded bitmaps?
The confusing part is, I've used the same file on Ubuntu 8, Ubuntu 10 and
Ubuntu 16 and it renders correctly on all of them.
>From my perspective it
> I'm curious why many scaled fonts look perfect in Ubuntu 16
> (freetype 2.6.1) , but terrible in Ubuntu 20 (2.10.1). To
> reproduce in Ubuntu 20:
Perhaps you should ask on an Ubuntu mailing list, as you
describe an Ubuntu issue, the assumption that Freetype is
involved is not entirely
The first image looks like it's coming from either an embedded bitmap or
from native TrueType hinting. The second looks like it's rasterized from
the outline.
Either way, it's not a matter of FreeType itself but of how it's used.
FreeType CAN render native TrueType hinting and/or embedded bitmaps
