Re: Default font: Transition from DejaVu to Noto
Thanks for your replies!
On 2023-09-10 05:23, Paul Wise wrote:
Personally, I found Noto Mono to be very ugly in comparison to the
DejaVu fonts that I was used to,
You did notice that we reversed to DejaVu Sans Mono for monospace, right?
https://salsa.debian.org/freedesktop-team/fontconfig/-/commit/6fae069d
Related discussion on the various IRC channels suggested that:
Noto is meant to be a fallback font (something like unifont but not
using bitmaps) not the default font for all or any languages.
Is the reasoning behind that position published anywhere?
One reason I ask is because upstream made Noto default, so did Fedora,
so is Ubuntu about to do, and so did some Ubuntu flavors a while ago.
Possibly the way the Noto fonts are packaged in Debian has something to
do with it. We have currently no way to install the Latin (or more
precisely the LCG — Latin, Cyrillic, Greek) fonts separately. This
limitation is discussed in <https://bugs.debian.org/983291>.
Noto makes the font selector useless because each alphabet shows up.
That is more or less true. A concern raised by M. Zhou too.
Also that is a consequence of the current situation with fonts-noto-core
providing fonts for all scripts, and you can't choose to install e.g.
LCG only.
Apparently the Noto meta package installs 700+ MB of font data, which
seems a bit excessive to some folks.
Hmm.. While that may be true for the fonts-noto meta package, please
note that it's the fonts-noto-core package for sans-serif and serif
(installed-size 43,6 MB) I argue for.
On 2023-09-10 06:30, M. Zhou wrote:
Aesthetic matter differs from person to person. As font can be seen as
kind of artwork, can we make a pool for the default font just like our
wallpaper?
Such a change would not be trivial. Maybe suitable for a feature request.
--
Rgds,
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
Reply to: