[Fontconfig] Why did the default font settings change around freetype 2.3 release and why isn't there at least a simple "no blurry fonts" settings?

[Maarten Maathuis]

Here are some screenshots, were the bad.jpg is a good approximation of the
original situation.

Maarten.

On 5/16/07, Behdad Esfahbod <besfahbo at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 22:14 +0200, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
> > Am i again asking the wrong mailinglist?
>
> Yes, your question really belongs to freetype list.  I don't know why
> Werner sent you this way.  Probably because he saw the XML snippets in
> your mail and automatically thought you have a fontconfig question.
>
> Other than that, it helps a lot if you ask smart questions [1].  You
> write "Around the release of freetype-2.3.0 default font settings
> changed".  If you know that, please explain what changed so people can
> help you.  If you assumed that everybody knows that, surprise, you are
> wrong.  Most of the time developer try to avoid irritating changes.  If
> you see one, more often than not the developers are not seeing it.
> Either because they don't know about it or you have something
> misconfigured on your system.
>
> Anyway, asking a question like yours without attaching before/after
> screenshots and listing your font options is almost guaranteed to not
> get any responses.
>
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> behdad
>
>
> [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> > On 5/15/07, Maarten Maathuis <madman2003 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >         Around the release of freetype-2.3.0 default font settings
> >         changed, i was faced with blurred fonts, unlike the nice fonts
> >         that i was used to.
> >
> >         My question are:
> >
> >         - Why are this default settings this way?
> >         - Why isn't there a simple unblurred setting?
> >
> >         After after some searching i found, the settings i needed to
> >         at least restore semi-acceptable fonts. Over time i tuned it
> >         and ended up with the local.conf at the bottom of this e-mail.
> >
> >         My question is, isn't it possible to use more sane defaults
> >         when the bytecode interpeter is on and maybe try to improve
> >         the default selection of fonts (override fonts that look like
> >         crap).
> >         Some fonts actually look quite good with just hinting.
> >
> >         Sincerely,
> >
> >         Maarten Maathuis.
> >
> >         <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >         <!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
> >         <fontconfig>
> >         <match target="font" >
> >         <edit mode="assign" name="rgba" > <const>none</const> </edit>
> >         <edit mode="assign" name="hinting" > <bool>true</bool>
> >         </edit>
> >         <edit mode="assign" name="antialias"> <bool>false</bool>
> >         </edit>
> >         <edit mode="assign" name="autohint" > <bool>false</bool>
> >         </edit>
> >         <edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle"> <const>hintfull</const>
> >         </edit>
> >         </match>
> >         </fontconfig>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fontconfig mailing list
> > Fontconfig at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
> --
> behdad
> http://behdad.org/
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20070517/d7985b8f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: good.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 28640 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20070517/d7985b8f/attachment-0002.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bad.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 28731 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20070517/d7985b8f/attachment-0003.jpg