>
>
> Really? I find that fonts are fuzzier without hinting.
Other fonts, however, look much better with the autohinter (which is turned
on using "dpkg-reconfigurew fontconfig-config") on.
> Ugly? No. xmms (a Gtk 1.2 app) has ugly fonts.
>
> Preferring Bitstream Vera Sans over Arial is just (valid) personal
> opinion.
Well, I guess I should qualify my statement. Arial is ugly on Linux *with
the autohinter on*.
I just guess I'll file a bug asking for Arial substitutions in the de
>
> Font server? Who needs to use xfs in 2007?
I guess I misspoke - I'm just using the default font configuration
toolchain.
Anyway... I must be misunderstanding something. Or don't recognize
> Arial's pervasiveness.
>
> I know this is going to sound stupid, but couldn't you just install
> Ari
>
>
> DE? Window manager?
I'm using GNOME 2.18 w/ Metacity, though it shouldn't matter - I want to
change the font server aliases, not the GNOME font settings.
Hi,
On Debian (both Etch and Lenny), I've noticed that in many applications
where the "Arial" font is used, the system reverts to an extremely ugly
bitmap Helvetica if Arial isn't installed. However, I would like the system
to substitute Bitstream Vera Sans instead. How can I do this?
Tim
Hi all,
I'm using LVM for all the partitions on my main hard drive (boot partition
excepted) for the ability to take "snapshots" of the partitions at a
particular point in time.
Anyway, while I have figured out perfectly how to take snapshots, mount
them, and read/write to/from them, I have yet t
>
>
>
> Sure other OSs do: Try convincing OpenBSD that you want a newer kernel.
> They'll tell you to wait six months. OTOH, NetBSD is a hacker's dream.
> Take your pick. FreeBSD may also do what you need but I haven't used it
> yet.
>
> I agree that it would be nice to have something a litle mor
>
>
> ISTM, though, that you are missing the point of Stable.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-getting.en.html#s-updatestable
>
> No new functionality is added to the stable release. Once
> a Debian version is released and tagged `stable' it will
> only get security updates. That is
>
>
> Sooo... download a vanilla .22 kernel and build it yourself.
>
> You've just got to do a little more yourself. It's the price of
> freedom. And not that difficult.
I know perfectly well how to build a kernel. What I'm asking for here is a
way to do this the "Debian way" - i.e., through A
n
backporting *everything* - mainly the components that improve hardware
support (the kernel,Xorg, etc). I actually don't mind the current Debian
release cycle - it's just the fact that often, the release can be hard to
use on newer hardware.
On 7/27/07, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 01:26:31PM -0400, Tim Hull wrote:
> > I'm currently trying out both Debian and Ubuntu on my MacBook to see
> which
> > one I prefer.
> > Right now, I'm currently liking Debian better - the stability seems
> bet
I know about that, but then you have to pull stuff like glibc etc from
unstable...
On 7/27/07, Jonathan Kaye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Tim Hull wrote:
>
> > I'm currently trying out both Debian and Ubuntu on my MacBook to see
> which
> > one I prefer.
I'm currently trying out both Debian and Ubuntu on my MacBook to see which
one I prefer.
Right now, I'm currently liking Debian better - the stability seems better,
and it seems easier to customize
- but I need to run software that's newer than what's in etch (not for a
lust for bleeding-edge, but
13 matches
Mail list logo
