What happened to the fonts? (Buster)

[a3e6u9]

Hello, I've just installed Buster but I find the fonts annoying, I liked them in Stretch. Here is what I mean:

[Head_on_a_Stick]

Which desktop is this?

Check the font settings, it's probably the hinting.

[a3e6u9]

I've disabled hinting now, there is a difference, but not an improvement:

[Head_on_a_Stick]

I've disabled hinting

There are four different hinting types available, try matching whichever setting stretch is using.

Did you check the antialiasing method?

[dotlj]

I've been running Buster on this box for at least a month, with KDE and can't notice any difference in fonts compared to Stretch.
I mostly use a terminal but with my HD screen, I can read the fine print quite clearly using default settings, which are in
System Settings > Fonts > Anti-aliasing - use Vendor Default
and in Font management - also using default values.

[GarryRicketson]

They both look the same to me, in the first post screen shots. And then the 3rd one , still looks the same,...

[a3e6u9]

They both look the same to me, in the first post screen shots. And then the 3rd one , still looks the same,...

They don't look the same, but the difference is slight. On my screen I find the difference annoying, on Buster there is a tinge. I think it's because of the lcdfilter setting, after I set it to lcdlegacy I saw an improvement. On Stretch, these settings are undistinguishable from the default ones, but on Buster there is still a difference, though the fonts look better (to me):

Code: Select all

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<fontconfig>
 <match target="font">
  <edit mode="assign" name="hinting" >
   <bool>true</bool>
  </edit>
 </match>
 <match target="font" >
  <edit mode="assign" name="autohint" >
   <bool>false</bool>
  </edit>
 </match>
 <match target="font">
  <edit mode="assign" name="hintstyle" >
  <const>hintfull</const>
  </edit>
 </match>
 <match target="font">
  <edit mode="assign" name="rgba" >
   <const>rgb</const>
  </edit>
 </match>
 <match target="font">
  <edit mode="assign" name="antialias" >
   <bool>true</bool>
  </edit>
 </match>
 <match target="font">
   <edit mode="assign" name="lcdfilter">
   <const>lcdlegacy</const>
   </edit>
 </match>
</fontconfig>


The funny thing is that I've seen people complain about the default Stretch fonts, which seem perfect to me and their "fix" makes the fonts look terrible (to me). So I guess that it depends on the screen/person.

[sickpig]

I wonder how world would look if you are colour blind. But as far as fonts are concerned I am blessed with being font blind, i dont absolutely mind whatever font it is. I am just not bothered by it. But I have been around a lot of people who are extremely intolerant of a different font-set. So I can identify with the OP however I agree with Garry both pics look the same.

[None1975]

Hello. You can try my fontconfig:

Code: Select all

<?xml version='1.0'?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM 'fonts.dtd'>
<fontconfig>

 <alias>
    <family>serif</family>
    <prefer><family>Linux Libertine</family></prefer>
  </alias>
  <alias>
    <family>sans-serif</family>
    <prefer><family>Linux Biolinum</family></prefer>
  </alias>
  <alias>
    <family>sans</family>
    <prefer><family>Linux Biolinum</family></prefer>
  </alias>
  <alias>
    <family>monospace</family>
    <prefer><family>Inconsolata</family></prefer>
  </alias>

   <!-- This sets Symbola as the final fallback font for the monospace font family. -->
  <match target="pattern">
        <test name="family"><string>monospace</string></test>
        <edit name="family" mode="append"><string>Symbola</string></edit>
    </match>

</fontconfig>

Also, you should install fonts-inconsolata and fonts-symbola

Code: Select all

sudo apt install fonts-inconsolata fonts-symbola

Looks like this:


Also in my .Xresource file, i have this settings

Code: Select all

Xft.dpi:       96
Xft.antialias: 1
Xft.hinting: 1
Xft.hintstyle: hintslight
Xft.rgba: rgb
Xft.lcdfilter: lcddefault

[Head_on_a_Stick]

@OP: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo ... =%23866950

[a3e6u9]

They both look the same to me, in the first post screen shots. And then the 3rd one , still looks the same,...

Let me show you the differences. It's amazing what some people think are nice fonts (4th one).

[a3e6u9]

@OP: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo ... =%23866950

Thank you, but the solutions don't work for me. Maybe I need to downgrade to the good fontconfig (or skip Buster altogether).

[L_V]

You should start from scratch with a fresh user session, or create a user test session to compare.
You may be hold some old settings over upgrades which are not necessary anymore.
I say this because I recently created a new user profile, and don't have any font problems in KDE in Buster with 100% default font setting.
I always had had more or less font problems in GTk applications (not as clean as expected), and now perfect in Buster.
I only had to disable font anti-aliasing in terminal.
Also check you don't have some old and totally obsolete Xorg settings somewhere in your system.

[fender0107401]

I like dejavu sans mono font, and I use this fond all the time.

[debianuser0000]

Hello.

I installed Debian 10 a week ago and saw that fonts are ugly.
I use xfce desktop.
So i checked debian 10 xfce live and found that fonts are ugly too.
Then i checked debian 9 xfce live and found that fonts are beautiful.

Below are scrennshots:
from debian 10 xfce live:
https://images90.fotosik.pl/220/6723cfbe845e8048.png
https://images90.fotosik.pl/220/6713598b7159911b.png
https://images89.fotosik.pl/220/98b83e2164b256a9.png

from debian 9 xfce live:
https://images92.fotosik.pl/221/c92f3f615507e23c.png
https://images89.fotosik.pl/220/ef24bd83a60048cf.png
https://images89.fotosik.pl/220/0a3787d8b50c84cf.png

I am not very experienced user.
What to do to fix fonts in debian 10?