[opensuse] Ugly looking fonts in Leap:42.2
Hi, after doing a clean Leap:42.2 install and importing my user and old home directory from 42.1, I have ugly fonts. I first thought it was firefox but opera looks the same. See cropped screenshot from firefox: http://pasteboard.co/2Tdo3TMF2.jpg I can vaguely remember a similar problem when I first installed 42.1 with my nVidia card installed with the nouveau driver but I experienced so many problems I took out the card. This is in plasma5 kde. I've enabled antialiasing and tried different system fonts and if I force font dpi the fonts just get smaller and bigger. This is my graphics setup : 08: PCI 02.0: 0300 VGA compatible controller (VGA) [Created at pci.378] Unique ID: _Znp.Ek_1fzLhuA5 SysFS ID: /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:02.0 SysFS BusID: 0000:00:02.0 Hardware Class: graphics card Device Name: "Onboard IGD" Model: "Intel 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller" Vendor: pci 0x8086 "Intel Corporation" Device: pci 0x0102 "2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller" SubVendor: pci 0x105b "Foxconn International, Inc." SubDevice: pci 0x0d8d Revision: 0x09 Driver: "i915" Driver Modules: "drm" Memory Range: 0xf7800000-0xf7bfffff (rw,non-prefetchable) Memory Range: 0xe0000000-0xefffffff (ro,non-prefetchable) I/O Ports: 0xf000-0xf03f (rw) IRQ: 25 (13282 events) I/O Ports: 0x3c0-0x3df (rw) Module Alias: "pci:v00008086d00000102sv0000105Bsd00000D8Dbc03sc00i00" Driver Info #0: Driver Status: i915 is active Driver Activation Cmd: "modprobe i915" Config Status: cfg=new, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown Primary display adapter: #8 10: None 00.0: 10000 Monitor [Created at monitor.125] Unique ID: rdCR.dtNmx6nn7j8 Parent ID: _Znp.Ek_1fzLhuA5 Hardware Class: monitor Model: "SAMSUNG SMB2030" Vendor: SAM "SAMSUNG" Device: eisa 0x063c "SMB2030" Serial ID: "H9LB501442" Resolution: 720x400@70Hz Resolution: 640x480@60Hz Resolution: 640x480@67Hz Resolution: 640x480@72Hz Resolution: 640x480@75Hz Resolution: 800x600@56Hz Resolution: 800x600@60Hz Resolution: 800x600@72Hz Resolution: 800x600@75Hz Resolution: 832x624@75Hz Resolution: 1024x768@60Hz Resolution: 1024x768@70Hz Resolution: 1024x768@75Hz Resolution: 1152x864@75Hz Resolution: 1600x900@60Hz Size: 443x249 mm Year of Manufacture: 2011 Week of Manufacture: 19 Detailed Timings #0: Resolution: 1600x900 Horizontal: 1600 1624 1704 1800 (+24 +104 +200) +hsync Vertical: 900 901 904 1000 (+1 +4 +100) +vsync Frequencies: 108.00 MHz, 60.00 kHz, 60.00 Hz Driver Info #0: Max. Resolution: 1600x900 Vert. Sync Range: 56-75 Hz Hor. Sync Range: 30-81 kHz Bandwidth: 108 MHz Config Status: cfg=new, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown Attached to: #2 (VGA compatible controller) Can anybody help? Thanks Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Dave Plater composed on 2016-11-27 09:52 (UTC+0200):
Hi, after doing a clean Leap:42.2 install and importing my user and old home directory from 42.1, I have ugly fonts. I first thought it was firefox but opera looks the same. See cropped screenshot from firefox:
One man's definition of "ugly" isn't every man's definition of "ugly". Exactly what about the fonts in that image causes you to describe them as "ugly"? Is the problem only with fonts in web pages? Are fonts also ugly in other apps and/or in FF and/or Opera UI text? Which Firefox version is that? 49? 50? 45ESR? Which GTK toolkit was used to build it (find it in about:config)? Which Opera version? A screenshot with more context would show us a lot more. Maybe an image of http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html surrounded by the rest of the desktop would be telling. Do note that many web pages do not use fonts installed on your system. Many use "web fonts", fonts downloaded as needed right along with the page's HTML, JS, images and CSS. So, the URI of any page of which complained is prerequisite to attempts to replicate what you see and examine its source. Just knowing you're on KDE on 42.2 on a 20" 1600x900 LCD isn't enough. Once I apply enough magnification to actually see anything in your screenshot the fonts look good to me. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
well i'm having almost the same problem, for me fonts in 42.2 are small, dense and blurry : http://oi63.tinypic.com/ix9zeq.jpg http://oi67.tinypic.com/30rqhc7.jpg i'm using Gnome my display res:1360*768 what i've done to restore fonts to the state in 42.1 was the following from Yast fonts module from the Preferred Families set the following for the sans-serif families: dejaVu sans for the serif families: Liberation serif for the monospace families:Liberation Mono i'm still studying the font-config manulas and the suse documentation : https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/startup/single-html/book.opensus... the image you uploaded doesn't show the exact problem you have, also when you upload images don't save in jpeg format it looks very bad use png instead -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 27/11/2016 11:09, Felix Miata wrote:
Dave Plater composed on 2016-11-27 09:52 (UTC+0200):
Hi, after doing a clean Leap:42.2 install and importing my user and old home directory from 42.1, I have ugly fonts. I first thought it was firefox but opera looks the same. See cropped screenshot from firefox:
One man's definition of "ugly" isn't every man's definition of "ugly". Exactly what about the fonts in that image causes you to describe them as "ugly"?
Is the problem only with fonts in web pages?
Are fonts also ugly in other apps and/or in FF and/or Opera UI text?
Which Firefox version is that? 49? 50? 45ESR? Which GTK toolkit was used to build it (find it in about:config)? Which Opera version?
A screenshot with more context would show us a lot more. Maybe an image of http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html surrounded by the rest of the desktop would be telling.
Do note that many web pages do not use fonts installed on your system. Many use "web fonts", fonts downloaded as needed right along with the page's HTML, JS, images and CSS. So, the URI of any page of which complained is prerequisite to attempts to replicate what you see and examine its source. Just knowing you're on KDE on 42.2 on a 20" 1600x900 LCD isn't enough. Once I apply enough magnification to actually see anything in your screenshot the fonts look good to me. dpi-screen-window.html displays the same in firefox, opera and konqueror. My fonts are blurry and seem out of proportion in firefox and opera but in konqueror they are larger. I have to rush off but I'm going to try Techno Tux's suggestion later. Screenshot from opera, opera and firefox display identical font problems | http://pasteboard.co/k8Xwm30I.png this looks the same in all three browsers.
Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
http://pasteboard.co/k8Xwm30I.png it will be interesting to tell us what is the content of the file /etc/sysconfig/fonts-config -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Dave Plater composed on 2016-11-28 07:32 (UTC+0200):
Felix Miata wrote:
One man's definition of "ugly" isn't every man's definition of "ugly". Exactly what about the fonts in that image causes you to describe them as "ugly"?
Is the problem only with fonts in web pages?
Are fonts also ugly in other apps and/or in FF and/or Opera UI text?
Which Firefox version is that? 49? 50? 45ESR? Which GTK toolkit was used to build it (find it in about:config)? Which Opera version?
A screenshot with more context would show us a lot more. Maybe an image of http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html surrounded by the rest of the desktop would be telling.
Do note that many web pages do not use fonts installed on your system. Many use "web fonts", fonts downloaded as needed right along with the page's HTML, JS, images and CSS. So, the URI of any page of which complained is prerequisite to attempts to replicate what you see and examine its source. Just knowing you're on KDE on 42.2 on a 20" 1600x900 LCD isn't enough. Once I apply enough magnification to actually see anything in your screenshot the fonts look good to me.
dpi-screen-window.html displays the same in firefox, opera and konqueror. My fonts are blurry and seem out of proportion in firefox and opera but in konqueror they are larger. I have to rush off but I'm going to try Techno Tux's suggestion later. Screenshot from opera, opera and firefox display identical font problems | http://pasteboard.co/k8Xwm30I.png this looks the same in all three browsers.
You didn't answer all questions I asked, your definition of "ugly" in particular, other than the single word blurry. I don't see blurry in either of your shots, only some typical effects of a low-ish pixel density SMB2030 LCD screen (its specs don't provide a dot pitch specification). And, you didn't provide a screenshot like I hoped for. These are more like what I was hoping for: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1600x1000x096-1.png http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1600x1000x108-1.png http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1680x1050x108-1.png The differences I see among Konq(v3), Opera (my first use of it since it adopted the WebKit rendering engine), and GTK2-built Firefox ESR 45, are significant, whether I'm viewing live on my 22" 1680x1050 screen, or the images I made, on either my 22" 1680x1050 or my 24" 1920x1200 screen. The primary distinction among them that I see is in Opera's not using the same primary font family as the other two, so it's hard to say whether its denser apparent stroke weights are on account of WebKit's rendering engine, or difference in the font used, or a combination of both. Plus, Opera cannot be made to apply the server's DPI, when it isn't 96, in that page, though it does manage to get the pt size fonts correctly sized, something I've not seen any non-Gecko, non-KHTML browser do in over half a decade. Thus some of the table numbers it produces are inaccurate. Among my three screenshots, I find nothing objectionable about any of the font renderings given the lower than average physical DPI of the screen used for either 1600x1000 (synthesized) or 1680x1050 (native) creation. Your 20" 1600x900 screen, if in fact it measures 20.0", has a calculated physical pixel density of 91.8 DPI. My 22" is 90.1. My 24" is 94.3. Different panels adapt differently to the differences between physical density (very rarely actually 96, or whatever multiple for "HiDPI" screen models) and logical density (typically 96). If you have any opportunity to do so, it might be worth your while to try a screen with higher density before blaming 42.2 for fonts you personally do not like. Average pixel density has been coming up over the years. Those under 96 are becoming more like dinosaurs, while the opposite extreme keeps climbing. It's simply not possible to please everyone while the range of densities and screen qualities are as wide as they are. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 28 November 2016 at 11:07, Felix Miata
You didn't answer all questions I asked, your definition of "ugly" in particular, other than the single word blurry. I don't see blurry in either of your shots, only some typical effects of a low-ish pixel density SMB2030 LCD screen (its specs don't provide a dot pitch specification).
And, you didn't provide a screenshot like I hoped for. These are more like what I was hoping for: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1600x1000x096-1.png http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1600x1000x108-1.png http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Suse/daveP-os422K3-1680x1050x108-1.png
The differences I see among Konq(v3), Opera (my first use of it since it adopted the WebKit rendering engine), and GTK2-built Firefox ESR 45, are significant, whether I'm viewing live on my 22" 1680x1050 screen, or the images I made, on either my 22" 1680x1050 or my 24" 1920x1200 screen. The primary distinction among them that I see is in Opera's not using the same primary font family as the other two, so it's hard to say whether its denser apparent stroke weights are on account of WebKit's rendering engine, or difference in the font used, or a combination of both. Plus, Opera cannot be made to apply the server's DPI, when it isn't 96, in that page, though it does manage to get the pt size fonts correctly sized, something I've not seen any non-Gecko, non-KHTML browser do in over half a decade. Thus some of the table numbers it produces are inaccurate.
Among my three screenshots, I find nothing objectionable about any of the font renderings given the lower than average physical DPI of the screen used for either 1600x1000 (synthesized) or 1680x1050 (native) creation. Your 20" 1600x900 screen, if in fact it measures 20.0", has a calculated physical pixel density of 91.8 DPI. My 22" is 90.1. My 24" is 94.3. Different panels adapt differently to the differences between physical density (very rarely actually 96, or whatever multiple for "HiDPI" screen models) and logical density (typically 96).
If you have any opportunity to do so, it might be worth your while to try a screen with higher density before blaming 42.2 for fonts you personally do not like. Average pixel density has been coming up over the years. Those under 96 are becoming more like dinosaurs, while the opposite extreme keeps climbing. It's simply not possible to please everyone while the range of densities and screen qualities are as wide as they are.
I was just writing a response to this thread but the above from Felix comprehensively addressed the vast majority of the points I wanted to make, so 'ditto' from me All I can add is that many months ago now, the contributors to Tumbleweed discussed the default fonts of openSUSE and chose the current ones based on their experiences, their testing, and a desire to pick defaults that worked better than the previous when it came to two main criteria - Looks good without patent-encumbered sub-pixel rendering enabled - Has consistent support for all languages/symbol families The new Tumbleweed defaults were a result of that work, were adopted with almost no complaints many months ago, and have since been also adopted in openSUSE Leap and even SUSE Linux Enterprise As the initiator of the font discussion all those months ago, I think I'm in a position to say it's a good story of how the community works together - I think practically every single font I suggested for the default was replaced with a justified alternative other people chose instead, and in every case I'm happier with the final outcome than both my suggested improvements and the original old default fonts. Fonts are always a tricky thing, no default font will please everyone, but in those cases you can always modify your local configuration to match. I think we're hitting the right balance for the broad audience Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
"try a screen with higher density before blaming 42.2 for fonts you personally do not like." with all due respect to you sir, usually people don't bother posting at the mailing lists just because they simply don't like fonts ... i personally suffered temporary extensive eyes tears drop while using 42.2 for a week(i usually spend all day looking at the computer screen) before switching back to 42.1... sure i would really be very happy to buy a new high pixel density monitor but i simply can't afford a new one and since my monitor can do 1360*768 i don't see any applications demand any bigger size to show all component "were adopted with almost no complaints many months ago" let me remind you sir that 42.1 users never had (was forced) to use the new fonts, the new fonts came as an OPTIONAL update in early 2016 , because of the following bug report: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=951898 http://pasteboard.co/3pjBb0KoQ.png here is the full patch details http://pastebin.com/raw/S8eRw3h1 people could simply "Taboo" that update patch and forget about it that is why not much people started complaining, i think that we should add a new optional update that when applied people can get the old fonts back -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 28 November 2016 at 16:39, TechnoTux
"were adopted with almost no complaints many months ago" let me remind you sir that 42.1 users never had (was forced) to use the new fonts, the new fonts came as an OPTIONAL update in early 2016 , because of the following bug report: https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=951898 http://pasteboard.co/3pjBb0KoQ.png
here is the full patch details http://pastebin.com/raw/S8eRw3h1
Yes, and the bug was marked RESOLVED, FIXED, and as you can see in the bug, no complaints about the chosen solution
people could simply "Taboo" that update patch and forget about it that is why not much people started complaining, i think that we should add a new optional update that when applied people can get the old fonts back
Marking packages or updates from the official repos as Taboo is, quite obviously, an unsupported action It shouldn't be considered surprising that 42.2 contains all of the updates from 42.1 by default I'm sorry you're finding the new fonts are unsuitable for you, but the solution for you is to redefine your font config to suit your needs, the defaults are the collective choice of the contributors to the openSUSE project and while nothing is ever set in stone I'm pretty sure your personal opinion alone is not enough to shift the direction we've all been working towards together now for over a year. Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 28/11/2016 08:31, TechnoTux wrote:
http://pasteboard.co/k8Xwm30I.png
it will be interesting to tell us what is the content of the file
/etc/sysconfig/fonts-config I've a complete backup of my 42.1 /etc and diff -u /etc/sysconfig/fonts-config /data/etc/sysconfig/fonts-config gives no differences so that isn't where the problem lies.
Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
I'm sorry you're finding the new fonts are unsuitable for you, but the solution for you is to redefine your font config to suit your needs, the defaults are the collective choice of the contributors to the openSUSE project and while nothing is ever set in stone I'm pretty sure your personal opinion alone is not enough to shift the direction we've all been working towards together now for over a year.
Regards,
Richard I think my choice of subject for this thread was a little over the top, ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I am of the opinion that the fonts that firefox and opera have in common are not displayed properly. The page in the link that Felix supplied looks normal to me. I wanted to update from 42.1 to 42.2 but I had many errors so I went for the new install instead. When I have time I will create a new user to see if the
On 28/11/2016 18:02, Richard Brown wrote: problem is carried over and I will also look through /etc for relevant differences. I shall report back when I have found the problem and possibly file a bug if needed. The ugly fonts are in gmail and openSUSE build service, I can live with them for now. Regards Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Dave Plater composed on 2016-11-29 09:12 (UTC+0200):
I think my choice of subject for this thread was a little over the top, ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I am of the opinion that the fonts that firefox and opera have in common are not displayed properly. The page in the link that Felix supplied looks normal to me. I wanted to
http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/dpi-screen-window.html
update from 42.1 to 42.2 but I had many errors so I went for the new install instead. When I have time I will create a new user to see if the problem is carried over and I will also look through /etc for relevant differences. I shall report back when I have found the problem and possibly file a bug if needed. The ugly fonts are in gmail and openSUSE build service, I can live with them for now.
The following pages employ the following CSS rules: https://build.opensuse.org/ https://en.opensuse.org/ font: 1em "Lucida Grande", Arial, "DejaVu Sans", Verdana, sans-serif; https://www.opensuse.org/ font-family: 'Source Sans Pro',sans-serif; (Someone probably should file a bug to sync the font family specifications among the above URIs. The latter is the newer, obviously to conform to "the collective choice of the contributors" according to Richard's up-thread response. cf. https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=951898) Excepting the generic name sans-serif last in the lists, of the font family names in the first rule above, only DejaVu Sans is installed in a default openSUSE 42.1 installation, and, DejaVu Sans is the standard family that sans-serif aliases to in 42.1. So, as long as optional fonts are not installed on the base system or in $HOME, DejaVu Sans is what will be seen on those first two URIs. Test with 'fc-match sans-serif'. In contrast in a default 42.2, 'fc-match sans-serif' will result in Roboto, so that's what the latter of the above three URI's would provide as the sans-serif fallback, except that it won't happen, because a default 42.2 install also includes Source Sans Pro, an apparent companion to Roboto as a "collective choice of the contributors". Thus, as long as (non-default) fonts (in those lists) are not installed, FF will be showing you DejaVu Sans, while 42.2 will be showing you Source Sans Pro. https://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox employs this font family rule: font-family: arial,sans-serif; So on Gmail you'll be seeing the difference between the two different sans-serif aliases as with the above openSUSE pages. To easily compare the difference between DejaVu Sans and Source Sans Pro (over/under), open the following: http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-comps-sourcepro.html#various If your carryover of your old user to 42.2 included optionally installed fonts, they might be in one or more of at least three locations, depending on how you "installed", among them: ~/.fonts/ ~/.config/fonts/ /usr/local/share/fonts/ If that's the case, you could still make a direct comparison of stock 42.1 vs. stock 42.2, without disrupting your fonts system generally, by renaming those locations temporarily. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
participants (4)
-
Dave Plater -
Felix Miata -
Richard Brown -
TechnoTux