Tobias Ulmer wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 10:30:04AM -0600, Matthieu Herrb wrote:
Tobias Ulmer wrote:
Another set of nice bitmap programmer fonts.
Does for some reason not work with the current freetype library (Seems
not to be specific to OpenBSD).
Well you should probably package the truetype versions of the fonts for
that, or at least provide a non-empty fonts.alias configuration file.
The truetype fonts look like sh*t on my box. Probably a wizard like
you can fix these totally easy to grasp XML files in /etc/fonts (with
their magnificent documentation...), but i can't be bothered for a font
that is bitmaped anyways :)
fonts.alias is a X11 thing to rename(alias) fonts? I'm not sure how i
make good use of that? Any pointers?
Right now, I don't have any, probably somewhere in the O'Reilly books...
Anyways the format is pretty straightforward when you look at those
files in other directories: each line has 2 parts: the first one is the
short name (the alias) composed uing the Postscript conventions
(blah-12, blah-bold-12, etc.) and the rest of the line is the full X11
font name that corresponds.
Anyway, they work fine with anything using normal X11 fonts like *term
etc.
You mean *obsolete* X11 fonts here...
Nowadays *normal* X11 fonts are the client-side rendered fonts (using
the fontconfig/Xft2/freetype combo, and things like pango if complicated
layouts are required)
That depends on your definition of "normal", for me, xterm plus a Xlib
only window manager are normal. And from what I hear, i'm not the
only one to use that obsolete stuff including quite a few of your fellow
OpenBSD developers ;)
Some OpenBSD developpers also use obsolete machines. There's nothing
wrong with that if it works for you, and you're aware of what you're doing.
Nevertheless, bitmapped fonts rendered by the X server where declared
dead by the X developpers around 2001, even before the XFree86 dismise.
All recent toolkits (gtk+, Qt, ...) now use client-side fonts. Xterm has
had support for them for several years.
Also it seems to me that the design of most glyphs of these fonts were
copied from an existing X font (schumacher-clean-medium) without giving
credit to the original author, but I may be wrong as I didn't look close
enough.
I think that claim/doubt doesn't belong on a public mailinglist. I've
compared some of them with xfontsel and they don't look similar to
me. Also e.g. http://proggyfonts.com/fontforums/viewtopic.php?t=14
indicates that the author doesn't even have access to a unix box at all.
I looked again, they are in fact similar but not identical. It's true
that the number of possibilities to draw a given glyph at a low
resolution are limited. Sorry for that.
I will build a debug version of fontconfig/freetype and see if i can
find the reason why it ignores these fonts alltogether.
Btw, why has fc-cache an undocumented -r option ('really_force')?
There's a documentation for fontconfig in
/usr/X11R6/share/doc/fontconfig in xenocara, in particular with some
information about how to debug problems using the FC_DEBUG environment
variable.
--
Matthieu Herrb
