[Bug 268668] x11-themes/classiclooks unduly force fontconfig antialias settings
- In reply to: bugzilla-noreply_a_freebsd.org: "[Bug 268668] x11-fonts/fontconfig does not honor lcdfilter setting"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2022 21:32:58 UTC
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=268668 --- Comment #9 from Bertrand Petit <email@example.com> --- (In reply to J.R. Oldroyd from comment #7) Configuration files in /usr/local/etc/fonts/conf.d are evaluated sequentially according to the ascending numerical order of the two digits integer prefixing the filenames stored in this directory. User's configuration files are loaded by the 50-user.conf file. Thus, the contents of any file whose number is larger that 50 forcibly overwrite settings done by the user, that is the case for 90-classiclooks_qt5fontfix.conf. Since the settings done by that file are heavy handed I recommend to either 1) rename it to 19-classiclooks_qt5fontfix.conf (it fits into the 10 to 19 range, called "system rendering defaults"); or 2) install it into /usr/local/etc/fonts/conf.avail, again with a 19 prefix number, to inhibit its effects until the user decide to enable it by moving it to the conf.d directory. Whichever option you choose will be OK for me since the effects will be reversible for 1) or not present at all by default for 2). As for the difference between the two images: please look closely to the curved sections of the rendered word, edges are colored, the unaffected rendering is monochrome. The colored version looks more blurry to me, especially at smaller sizes. Adding blur to an already myopic vision is not a positive effect. We all have different visual system performances, the colored version probably look better to other people I'm unfit to judge. I think we should not force one rendering method over another because of these biological differences. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.