On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 09:35:16PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > Would help if I actually attached the screenshots.
Could you please provide for comparison a screenshot using the Cantarell font when using the older version of freetype (with CFF disabled)? I can certainly see the differences between the two screenshots, but what I see when looking at the Sans screenshot is the shaping is horrible - with the F and T in the headers very crisp but horribly shaped, and the shaping on "Window Titles" so bad that the dot of the i sits *above* the cross of the T. So I would have a hard time arguing that this behavior is more correct than the behavior shown with Cantarell, which has definitely traded off crispness for correctness of shape, and I would like to directly compare before/after of the change in freetype. Sorry to ask you for this, but I don't run a GNOME desktop, so this seems the quickest way to get the information needed to move this bug forward. I could try running GNOME in a VM but I'm concerned that being in a VM rather than with a real LCD monitor might prevent accurately reproducing the behavior you're seeing, and setting up to run GNOME on real hardware would take me a bit more effort. I have tried to compare the before/after behavior of freetype with the Cantarell font on a unity desktop, and despite the fact that unity and gnome should both be working against the same fontconfig settings, I'm not able to discern any difference in the appearance between the old and new freetype when configuring the Cantarell on unity: neither shows the "snap to grid" behavior of font stems that you appear to be requesting. The other things I notice here: - Your screenshots show an antialiasing setting of "grayscale". A zoomed-in view of both screenshots shows that this setting is being respected. In your previous screenshots for bug #730742, it appears that subpixel antialiasing was in play. Is this because you had different fontconfig settings selected at that time, or is it because the earlier freetype was not correctly respecting the "grayscale" setting? - You have a hinting setting of "medium". How does the appearance of this font vary for you with different values of hinting? Is there no other value for the hinting setting that gives the crispness you're looking for, or is there some other reason that these other hinting settings are unsatisfactory for you? The Adobe CFF behavior I'm seeing (both in your new screenshots and in my local testing) suits *my* personal tastes just fine. Unless you can point to a specific way in which freetype is buggy when using the Adobe CFF engine and either misinterpreting a font or failing to respect fontconfig preferences, I can't see disabling Adobe CFF again in Debian. In the original bug, there was a comment indicating that a new version of fontconfig would be released soon that included a configuration setting for handling different hint styles for CFF fonts vs. others: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=88;bug=730742 That was in 2013, however, and we still have fontconfig 2.11.0 in Debian. Time for an upgrade? There were also the comments on the upstream list that the Cantarell font itself showed buggy hints: http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/freetype/2014-01/msg00011.html There is a new upstream version of Cantarell in Debian since that mail was written (0.0.16-1, uploaded Sep 2014). I had assumed that this release specifically addressed these bugs in the font hints. Was this not the case? Particularly as we have other users specifically requesting the CFF engine (bug #795653) because it substantially improves the display of other fonts, I don't think we should keep this functionality disabled in freetype indefinitely to accommodate a buggy font, even if this font is a default for GNOME. If no one is going to take care of the bugs on this font, maybe it's not a good choice of default. There's also a bug report about cantarell in Fedora, including a fontconfig setting that would avoid the use of CFF specifically for this font until the bug can be fixed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062903 On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 09:48:57AM -0700, j...@joshtriplett.org wrote: > Any feedback on this bug? This issue makes GNOME's UI painfully blurry, > and the version with this issue just migrated to testing today, exposing > many more people to this issue. Of course, if you considered this bug severe enough to warrant keeping the package out of testing, the correct thing to have done was to file the bug at severity: serious. At the moment, my inclination is to reassign this bug to the fonts-cantarell package. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
