Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 04:54:42 +0000
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: gecko@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 238482] x11-fonts/fontconfig: Firefox print pre-formatting is HORRIBLE ("bitmap font by default")
Message-ID: <bug-238482-21738-WHywjX5UGa@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-238482-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-238482-21738@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D238482 --- Comment #15 from Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg-freebsd@tristatelogic.com> --- Thank you for your patience and your understanding that this is a user experience issue. I and many others have made clear that the end user experience with the current default fonts configuration is entirely less th= an optimal. (I have already posted links to other online comments by other parties who feel as I do about these bitmapped fonts, and about the pointle= ss hassle they represent, and even the Handbook calls these fonts out as being ugly.) I should note also that since I have changed my font configuration to rid myself of the abomination that is, apparently, bitmapped fonts, I have seen -zero- ill effects. That fact in turn causes me to wonder why we are even still discussing this. Is there some ambiguity or some specific person or group who is pushing for bitmapped fonts to remain as a default part of the default font configuration on FreeBSD? If the bitmapped fonts aren't actually helping anybody, then it seems like rather a no-brainer to turn them off by default. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-238482-21738-WHywjX5UGa>