[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bitmap fonts: Can they be rejected by default instead of with manual intervention?

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 08:46:25 +0200
"Miriam Ruiz" <miriam@debian.org> wrote:

> 2008/8/22 Daniel Dickinson <cshore@fionavar.ca>:
> > On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:39:29 -0700
> > Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> >> > Is there any reason this isn't the default behaviour?
> >>
> >> It is the default.
> >>
> >
> > Hmmm...I don't know how mine got to this state then.  Probably did
> > dpkg-reconfigure and forgot I had done so.
> >
> > Anyway it's cool that it's the default.
> I don't have the symlink to /etc/fonts/conf.avail/70-no-bitmaps.conf
> in /etc/fonts/conf.d that you mention in my computer either, and I
> didn't modify anything there myself. Are you sure it's the default?

Did you say Yes instead of No to the bitmapped fonts question when
fontconfig-config was upgraded?  I don't know if I did or not
(intentionally I mean.  I don't remember if I just hit ENTER to accept
defaults or if I (stupidly) changed it).  It's one of those questions
that one doesn't necessarily understand the consequences of, even after
reading the message text.  Or perhaps I hit ENTER but because it was
Yes in previous versions of fontconfig, the Yes was the default instead
of No (which is what I want, really).



And that's my crabbing done for the day.  Got it out of the way early, 
now I have the rest of the afternoon to sniff fragrant tea-roses or 
strangle cute bunnies or something.   -- Michael Devore
GnuPG Key Fingerprint 86 F5 81 A5 D4 2E 1F 1C      http://gnupg.org
No more sea shells:  Daniel's Weblog    http://cshore.wordpress.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: