(Cc'd back to the list) On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 11:53:33AM -0700, Jim McCloskey wrote: | | on Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 11:26:44PM -0400, dman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: | | > Ok, I know you're all tired of hearing about X font problems, but this | > problem is a bit different and wasn't solved by any of the recently | > posted solutions. | > | > Ok, I have a woody box (that got sid by accident several weeks ago). | > I tried reordering the FontPath lines in the X config file. Then I | > got some messed up fonts in X and the warning that the Type1 and | > Speedo directories weren't valid FontPaths. The visual problem is | > that in gnome-terminal, gvim, and x-chat the font is way too big now. | | I had what at least sounds like the same problem after an X | upgrade---huge ugly fonts all over the place. It drove me up the | walls. I tried all sorts of increasingly desperate strategems, but the | resolution turned out to be embarrassingly straightforward. At some | point XF86Config-4 was overwritten in such a way that the font-path | for the 100dpi fonts was ordered before the font-path for the 75dpi | fonts in the `Files' section. I'm not sure how or when this happened | but when I reversed the order, all returned to normal.
Yes, this is exactly it! The latest dexconf-generated config had the 100dpi before the 75dpi fonts. I switched them (both the :unscaled and the other pair) and now everything is back (well, once I put the settings back in gvim and gnome-terminal. | You say that you tried reordering the font-path lines, but it wasn't | clear to me what changes exactly you made, so I thought it might be | worth passing on my own experience. Thanks! | The only consolation for me was that before I hit on the stupidly | obvious right answer, I had learned a lot about font-management under | X. Sigh, So, did you learn why the lower res fonts look better? It seems counter-intuitive to me. -D
