From rpm-list-admin@freshrpms.net Wed Oct 9 10:52:07 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: zzzz@localhost.example.com Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1]) by example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3254416F20 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:51:28 +0100 (IST) Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for zzzz@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 09 Oct 2002 10:51:28 +0100 (IST) Received: from egwn.net (ns2.egwn.net [193.172.5.4]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g996jAK22972 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 07:45:10 +0100 Received: from auth02.nl.egwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by egwn.net (8.11.6/8.11.6/EGWN) with ESMTP id g996b2f06803; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:37:02 +0200 Received: from bennew01.localdomain (pD900DDF4.dip.t-dialin.net [217.0.221.244]) by egwn.net (8.11.6/8.11.6/EGWN) with ESMTP id g996aAf01341 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:36:10 +0200 Received: from bennew01.localdomain (bennew01.localdomain [192.168.3.1]) by bennew01.localdomain (8.12.5/linuxconf) with SMTP id g996a33S019398 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:36:03 +0200 From: Matthias Haase To: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net Subject: Re: RedHat 8.0 and his own freetype Message-Id: <20021009083602.6a8bcf32.matthias_haase@bennewitz.com> In-Reply-To: <3DA3C96B.7050007@eecs.berkeley.edu> References: <20021004155451.52f9ecd5.matthias_haase@bennewitz.com> <3D9E1F20.3050300@eecs.berkeley.edu> <20021008202424.67c6e32c.matthias_haase@bennewitz.com> <3DA3C96B.7050007@eecs.berkeley.edu> X-Operating-System: customized linux smp kernel 2.4* on i686 X-Mailer: Sylpheed MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailscanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean Sender: rpm-zzzlist-admin@freshrpms.net Errors-To: rpm-zzzlist-admin@freshrpms.net X-Beenthere: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rpm-zzzlist@freshrpms.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Freshrpms RPM discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:36:02 +0200 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:36:02 +0200 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, T_NONSENSE_FROM_40_50 version=2.50-cvs X-Spam-Level: On Tue, 08 Oct 2002 23:15:07 -0700 Ben Liblit wrote: > Ick. Perhaps this is why Red Hat turned the bytecode interpreter off. > It may improve non-antialiased rendering, but only at the expense of > making a mess of antialiased rendering. > > This may come down to a matter of personal aesthetics, but for my part, > I'm going back to Red Hat's standard packages with the bytecode > interpreter turned *off*. Yes, confirmed, but for my part, I'm using mostly non-antialiased fonts and they are true ugly without the bytecode interpreter enabled. Remember my stupid request about your RPM ;-) -- Regards from Germany Matthias _______________________________________________ RPM-List mailing list http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list