Try tweaking your DPI. I have this in my .xinitrc (well, it's actually my ~/.xfce4/xinitrc, but same thing).
xrdb -merge - << EOF Xft.dpi: 96 Xft.hinting: 1http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=6049&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30 Xft.hintstyle: hintmedium Xcursor.size: 16 Xcursor.theme: whiteglass EOF
This is not DPI at all, it's something else. I have the same problem (we've also been discussing this on another thread) and one thing i've assured is that it has nothing to do with DPI or fonts itself, but with the way fonts are rendered. I've also tried different versions of libfreetype and i couldn't solve it at all. This must be something else...
]]>let's see them in something other than gNOme.
ummm... OK!
http://conveyableflow.com/images/screenerie.png
It's a different browser too, so the fonts are smaller, but I still don't think they suck. However, I suck at determining that, so rate my fonts please!
they're not bad for the "bad" fonts. the kerning is a little off (e.g., "Post" all scrunched together and "subject" all spread apart) and the couriers are not so great. you seem to have more antialiasing than i do, though it's a little fuzzy with the infamous aa "shadow." you can see they are much better in the gnome shot. i'd give them a 7.
]]>let's see them in something other than gNOme.
ummm... OK!
http://conveyableflow.com/images/screenerie.png
It's a different browser too, so the fonts are smaller, but I still don't think they suck. However, I suck at determining that, so rate my fonts please!
]]>I'm using freetype 2.1.9 now, do my fonts suck?
no, they're pretty good -- they're a little fuzzy maybe, but they have good shapes. but let's see them in something other than gNOme.
IT'S NOT DPI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :evil:
xrdb -nocpp -merge - << EOF
Xft.dpi: 96
Xft.hinting: 1
Xft.hintstyle: hintmedium
EOF
xrdb -merge - << EOF
Xft.dpi: 96
Xft.hinting: 1
Xft.hintstyle: hintmedium
Xcursor.size: 16
Xcursor.theme: whiteglass
EOF
Libfreetype changed lots from version 2.1.7 to 2.1.8. There shouldn't be any migration problems with most GNOME and KDE applications, but e.g. GNUstep 's art backend wouldn't compile. That was the status a couple of weeks ago; it's likely that by now most if not all freetype-enabled applications should work just fine.
93,
-Sascha.rb
It's not a hardware problem, if it was then the screenshots would look good while it's ugly onscreen. I still think it's a matter of fonts installed and configuration.
i'm not sure what you mean, "configuration." it's the same configuration: a full/default slackware install. why would a default configuration look different on two different computers if it weren't somehow related to the hardware? :?:
the screenshot is a static image of how the fonts are rendering at a particular point in time. those are going to look the same no matter what.
]]>but here's an update: my roommate has been wanting to get into linux, so last night i installed slackware 10. the fonts look unbelievable :shock: -- i don't think i've ever seen fonts look that good even on a mac. i compiled a stripped-down kernel taking out all the stuff i usually take out just to make sure it's not some stupid miscellaneous kernel option causing the problem, and everything is still good.
then i installed arch on the same computer: base install, xfce4 + dependencies, mozilla. the fonts were all wonky again.
so that leads me to conclude it is some sort of hardware/software conflict. it's not totally software, b/c neither the fonts in arch nor in slack 10 work right on my computer. and it's not totally hardware, because fonts *used* to look good on my hardware (radeon, DVI LCD) before slack 10, so something must have changed somewhere in the software as it relates to certain hardware. :?: confusing.
a few weeks ago i switched my radeon for a matrox, but i saw no improvement in arch or in slack. so i don't think it's that. i guess that just leaves either some problem linux now has with DVI . . . or maybe nvidia nforce2 is the culprit? something to do with the agp bus or chipset? my roommate's computer is a via chipset, and an nvidia gf4mx, i believe (i used the vesa drivers).
i guess what i should do is put my matrox or radeon in that computer and see what the LCD looks like. if it looks bad, then it's the DVI. if it looks good, then it's probably the nforce2 mobo chipset causing the problem (in slack -- that still doesn't fix arch, though ).
]]>for example, my bitstream sans fonts in firefox look exactly like yours:
http://datadump.homelinux.com/fontconfi … ox_bvs.png
but if i wanted to use times new roman or verdana or some other font i couldn't do that, and that hinders my ability to use linux the way i want to:
http://datadump.homelinux.com/fontconfi … _serif.png
i have been trying to find out what's wrong so we can all use whatever font we want and have it look great, rather than being limited to just one or two fonts that merely look "okay" or "passable." since most people are content with "merely okay," it hasn't been easy, but maybe as people want to branch out more from using just bitstream fonts all the time momentum will build toward figuring it out.
> btw, here are the luxi sans fonts when everything is working properly:
http://datadump.homelinux.com/fontconfi … xisans.png
you can obviously see the difference!
Here a screenshot of my Firefox font settings, if they matter at all.
I recently switched from Xfree86 to Xorg, and didn't notice any difference in my fonts.
]]>