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

Re: 2nd try? fontconfig? autohinter? anyone?

On Sat, Oct 11, 2003 at 03:40:12PM -0700, Tom wrote:
> Well, then, I'll stick with the decision I made six months ago:
> the autohinter looks worse than the bytecode interpreter.
> You know, this is the first slipup in the Matrix I've experienced
> since I switch to Linux.  

They've happened, you just didn't notice.

> (I hope you get that: 9 months ago I was
> a MS-employee. I mean to say: taboo subject about which we are
> embaressed so we'll pretend it isn't worth discussing...
> Less than complete intellectual forthrightness... Patent issue
> we cannot overcome...)
> Not that it's a big deal, just find the arbitriness curious...
> Everything else is rational.

I think it's more that nobody has any strong views on the subject. I
didn't even know fontconfig existed until I read this. I find it's
installed, but I've never knowingly used it, even though I seem to
have 97 packages that depend on it.

You might find it profitable to experiment with fontconfig until you
find a configuration that produces behaviour that differs between
emacs and vi. You can then start a thread on that subject which will
attract many responses, from which you should be able to select one
that you can steer in the direction of discussing your real issue. :-)


Be kind to pigeons
Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21C61F7F

Attachment: pgp4jHT6P0Nog.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: