On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 6:04 AM, Roland Mainz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dave Miner wrote: > [snip] >> Alan Coopersmith wrote: >> > Dave Miner wrote: > [snip] >> An interesting set of options, I'm open to any of them and we can figure >> out how to test some of them out. My main observation is that we appear >> to be shipping a lot more fonts (not all of which come from >> FSWxorg-fonts, I'm sure) than either of the Linux distros examined >> (xlsfonts reports around 5200 for OpenSolaris, 2600-3000 for them, >> corresponding file system area on Ubuntu is about 40% smaller). Can we >> remove some with minimal impact on user experience? I'm not the expert >> here, so you guys tell me what makes the most sense. > > I wouldn't recommend removing fonts. Indiana already has a big problem > because it lacks many many of the commercial fonts shipped with Solaris > making the "font experience" of users not very good (compared to what > ships to a full install of Solaris 10) and some locales have real > problems because glyphs are missing. IMO we _urgendly_ need more fonts > installed by default and not less.
But are many of the fonts included going to be really be used ? I doubt if some of the older fonts really are a substitute of the commercial fonts in Solaris. > > For the space issue there may be several options: > 1. Use better font compression (e.g. *.bz2 vs. *.gz) as discussed in > this thread (or none if we use LOFI compression, see item [4] below) > 2. Combine some of the bitmap (BDF/PCF) fonts into TrueType wrappers > 3. Teach the Xserver font code to do bitmap font re-encoding itself > (currently Xorg ships one *-iso10646-1 font re-encoded for each of the > *-iso8859-* encoding). This isn't much since the matching re-encoded > fonts usually only contain up to 256 glyphs but it's still some space > used-up > 4. Assuming we use LOFI compression one option may be to re-order the > listing of the font files in a way that the re-encoded fonts come > directly after the *-iso10646-1 master font. Since the glyphs in the > re-encoded fonts are repeated in the *-iso10646-1 master fonts the > compression will catch this and reduce the re-encoded fonts to dust. This will not help. Every segment in lofi is compressed independently. A single common dictionary is not used. It is one possible enhancement that has been in my mind for a while but not yet gotten around to actually implementing it. Regards, Moinak. > > ---- > > Bye, > Roland > > -- > __ . . __ > (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer > /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 > (;O/ \/ \O;) > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > -- ================================ http://www.belenix.org/ http://moinakg.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
