Re: Problem with Iceweasel and low-quality fonts
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 03:38:47 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-06-15 16:00:10 +0000, Camaleón wrote:
>> For the sample page you mention in the report, I get the proper
>> results, I mean, Firefox loads "Lucida Sans Unicode" which is the
>> second alternative font face specified by the CSS style and I have it
>> installed in my system.
>>
>> sm01@stt008:~$ fc-match 'Lucida Sans Unicode'
>> l_10646.ttf: "Lucida Sans Unicode" "Normal"
>
> It doesn't seem to be in Debian.
It's a Windows font but what I wanted to say is that Firefox does what
fontconfig says, no disagreements here.
>> Do you have any of the mentioned fonts ("Lucida Grande, Lucida Sans
>> Unicode, Lucida, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif") installed in your
>> system?
>
> "Lucida" is the first one, and it is a bitmap font:
But the first one is "Lucida Grande" and your fontconfig points to
"Bitstream Vera Sans" as a replacement and that's the font Firefox
renders.
> luRS12-ISO8859-1.pcf.gz: "Lucida" "Sans"
>
> Hence the problem.
Why do you think Lucida is the rendered font? The image you're attaching
does not resemble Lucida :-?
Anyway, my point is that Firefox tries to render the first of the fonts
defined in the CSS styles (in order) and when it finds a 1:1 replacement
it loads that font. If there's no such coincidence, it uses the system
settings for the font substitution, in your case "Bitstream Vera Sans".
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
Reply to: