Re: Will my fonts every look good?
In article <[🔎] y68hecom9f4.fsf@multics.mit.edu>, David Z Maze wrote:
> "Stig Are M. Botterli" <samb@mo.himolde.no> writes:
>
>> In article <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.10.10301032238110.14636-100000@mardy.hank.org>, Bill Moseley wrote:
>>>
>>> ii gsfonts-x11 0.16 Make Ghostscript fonts available to X11.
>>
>> This package is a real uglificator. Replace it with a dummy equiv.
>
> Why do you say that? That package makes the PostScript fonts included
> with the GhostScript PS interpreter available to X. My experience has
> been that PostScript fonts are generally superior to bitmapped fonts,
> except at what these days are unusually low resolutions; if you want a
> non-standard resolution, bitmapped fonts are right out. I'd actually
> consider this package essential to coming up with font support that
> doesn't suck.
Superior to bitmapped fonts, sure, but inferior to the scalable fonts it
overrode. When I googled for a quick fix to my problem, I found I wasn't the
only person who had issues with this package.
Reply to: