On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 08:59:17PM +0200, Grigorios Bouzakis wrote: > Chapter 2 :P > > Now regarding a possible replacement of the ttf-ms-fonts package from > extra. > As i have said before i am no expert on the topic. > I have seen people on the web claiming that there is no real substitute > for this package. I have also read that webpage font rendering is better > and faster with the use of those fonts cause most pages are created > using some of these fonts. > My experiments during the last days rather prove the above points, even > though i didnt get into the core of this messing with font configuration > files. > > There are many popular font packages in AUR, some even in Community [7-9] > as well as many others too available across the web.eg. [10] > Maybe a combination of some of those packages will suffice for the > replacement? Is an effort to achieve this worth it? > > I would love hearing what others more relevant with this users have to > say about this. > I dislike anti-aliasing, but all ttf fonts are ugly without it, except ms fonts. That's the only reason I had for installing them. But well, there is also bitmap fonts, and that's actually mainly what I'm using right now. I often heard the web reason also, but I'm not totally convinced by it. A lot of web pages look alright with different fonts. Anyway, even if I find that these fonts look great, I have nothing against moving them to unsupported, if that could remove potential legal issues.
