User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account



Posted Jun 10, 2004 21:33 UTC (Thu) by pimlott (guest, #1535)
In reply to: Font by corbet
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's guide to terminal emulators

Ok, can anyone tell me why Jon's font, -adobe-courier-medium-r-normal--12-120-75-75-m-70-iso8859-1 looks like hell (screenshot of xterm -fn -adobe-courier-medium-r-normal--12-120-75-75-m-70-iso8859-1) on my Debian testing system? These are bitmap fonts, so there's no reason they should vary at all, right? I even restarted X with different -dpi resolutions, with no difference.

I've always wondered why many of the bitmap fonts were so ugly, but maybe I'm doing something wrong? Finding a terminal font for X is a torturous process for me. I used the venerable fixed aka 6x13 aka -misc-fixed-medium-r-semicondensed--13-120-75-75-c-60-iso8859-1 for many years, but when I got a high-res laptop (133 dpi), that was too small. I don't even care what the font face is called, I just want a nice, clean bitmap font (a well-hinted truetype font would be fine, but the hinting patents seem to rule that out) at a readable pixel size. After much trial and error, I found terminus-16 aka -xos4-terminus-medium-r-normal--16-160-72-72-c-80-iso10646-1 from the xfonts-terminus package in Debian. But I don't understand why there isn't a font picker that can just show me all 8x16 bitmap fonts available, and why there are so many unusably-ugly bitmap fonts.

(Log in to post comments)


Posted Jun 11, 2004 3:14 UTC (Fri) by pimlott (guest, #1535) [Link]

Argh, I'm an idiot. I didn't have xfonts-75dpi installed.

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds