Updates to fontconfig uglify firefox

Bug #40698 reported by Andrew Somerville
4
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
fontconfig (Ubuntu)
Confirmed
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

fontconfig-2.3.2-1.1ubuntu10 changes some of the fonts in firefox. New fonts significantly reduce the readablity of many websites including http://slashdot.org and http://bugzilla.ubuntu.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&resolution=DUPLICATE&resolution=---&bugidtype=include&cmdtype=doit&component=fontconfig

Changed in fontconfig:
status: Unconfirmed → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Laurent Bigonville (bigon) wrote :

I can confirm this the fonts look smaller, this sometimes reduces readability

Revision history for this message
Andrew Somerville (andy-somerville) wrote :

Its not just the size, the typeface difference is also a big factor, along with the poorer rendering of some of those type faces, are also important. The former font configuration was preferable in Firefox.

Revision history for this message
João Pinto (joaopinto) wrote :

The changes on the foncontig were related to Bug #39447, the newest update (which from the changelog was expected to be a better fix) repeats the symptom: horrible, hardly readable fonts on firefox.

Revision history for this message
Bruce Cowan (bruce89-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

Mine's alright with fontconfig 2.3.2-1.1ubuntu10. You shouldn't be using Ubuntu Bugzilla though.

description: updated
Revision history for this message
Andrew Somerville (andy-somerville) wrote :

(hmm, lost a comment)
This report is regarding the reintroduction of the bug present in 8 to v10, and therefore is not duplicate. Apparently v9 fixed the bug and v 10 broke it again.

For those who do not notice the difference, its possible that you have, in the past, customized the fonts for firefox and so dont see the change.

Revision history for this message
rubinstein (rubinstein) wrote :

Is there a reason why we have this separate bug report? I think this bug is a duplicate of Bug #39447, feel free to reopen if necessary.

Revision history for this message
rubinstein (rubinstein) wrote :

Ok, don't read the last comment by Andy Somerville; but I don't think this is a valid reason; in Bug #39447 there are already comments about the reintroduction of the problem.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.