| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
what about....what about....Posted Feb 12, 2008 2:42 UTC (Tue) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159)In reply to: what about.... by liljencrantz Parent article: LCA: Two talks on the state of X
Sun tried this with STSF:
http://stsf.sourceforge.net/about.html
It was not exactly a success, but did offer some benefits over fontconfig/Xft if you were
running hundreds of X servers from a single machine. When running just a single X server,
these benefits were not apparent and the increased complexity for developers is a clear minus.
(Log in to post comments)
what about.... Posted Feb 14, 2008 9:21 UTC (Thu) by liljencrantz (subscriber, #28458) [Link] I completely missed the existence of stsf, thank you for the pointer. I read up a bit on why it failed, and the main reason (judging from mailing list posts, at least) seems to be that the various X hackers (e.g. Havoc Pennington and various GTK hackers) felt that fontconfig was good enough. And in all fairness, that is probably completely true if you don't care about network transparency. I've never heard any other serious criticism against fontconfig except for the client side rendering issue.
|
|
||||||||||||