Beautiful Fonts in 12.1 - Page 3

Petri Kaukasoina · 06-22-2008, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daedra

replace the mozilla-firefox.slackbuild file with the edited one four here http://webpages.charter.net/daedra/1...fox.SlackBuild

Hi,

I suggest changing --enable-optimize=-O2 to

Code:

--enable-optimize="-O2 -march=i686"

or to

Code:

--enable-optimize="$SLKFLAGS"

and then adding lines for i686 above where SLKFLAGS is set like this:

Code:

elif [ "$ARCH" = "i686" ]; then
  SLKCFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686"

Daedra · 06-22-2008, 05:45 PM

Good call, thank you for that, I updated the file.

Thanks Again.

Oliver_H · 06-22-2008, 06:34 PM

You should enable jemalloc to for better memory mangement etc. It's default in the Mozilla builds. This is new in Firefox 3.

–enable-jemalloc

Toods · 06-22-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_H

You should enable jemalloc to for better memory mangement etc. It's default in the Mozilla builds. This is new in Firefox 3.

–enable-jemalloc

If it is default in the mozilla builds, then my understanding is that it should not be necessary to add it to .mozconfig. I understood that '.mozconfig' settings are only necessary to change the build configuration from the defaults that are specified in the source tree.

Bill.

Petri Kaukasoina · 06-23-2008, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_H

You should enable jemalloc to for better memory mangement etc. It's default in the Mozilla builds.

about:buildconfig in the navigation toolbar shows the compiler flags and the configure arguments used. The default linux binary shows only these configure arguments:

--enable-application=browser --enable-update-channel=release --enable-update-packaging --enable-optimize --disable-debug --disable-tests --enable-official-branding

Toods · 06-23-2008, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petri Kaukasoina

about:buildconfig in the navigation toolbar shows the compiler flags and the configure arguments used. The default linux binary shows only these configure arguments:

--enable-application=browser --enable-update-channel=release --enable-update-packaging --enable-optimize --disable-debug --disable-tests --enable-official-branding

Yes, this is exactly my point. about:buildconfig will only show the additional build options specified in 'mozconfig'. It does not for example show which 'toolkit' is used for the build or whether libxul is built. Both of these of course are.

I would like to know of a way to query the source tree to find all the default configuration options of which there are many.
Bill

Oliver_H · 06-23-2008, 07:14 AM

>If it is default in the mozilla builds, then my understanding is that it should not be necessary to add it to .mozconfig.

Otherwise it doesn't kill you ;-) I don't know whether it's activated by default so I enabled it myself just to be sure.

dugan · 06-23-2008, 09:56 AM

When I built Firefox from source, I encountered this bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=409192

Did this happen to anyone else?

detpenguin · 06-24-2008, 09:43 PM

i've used slackware since 9.1, and i have to admit it has never looked this good. thanks! Great Post!!!

Daedra · 06-26-2008, 12:09 AM

Just to update everyone, I changed the slackbuild. It seems if you have read the post "firefox 3.0 + thunderbird = no email links" it turns out the Pat's firefox/thunderbird patch doesn't seem to be needed anymore and in some cases (mine and otheres) it was causing problems, I now have removed the patch from the slackbuild and now my email problem is fixed. So on the safe side I changed the build however you can still download the original slackbuild from here http://webpages.charter.net/daedra/1...SlackBuild.old

dugan · 06-28-2008, 06:34 PM

To the SlackBuild, I recommend fixing the blank applications menu bug.

The Bugzilla entry:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=409192

The patch:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=325195

I added the patch to my SlackBuild and now everything works perfectly. (The crashing problem I mentioned earlier seems to have solved itself).

Daedra · 06-28-2008, 09:11 PM

So this patch is all you need to fix the application problem? I thought I read that you had to compile a whole bunch of gnome stuff to get that working? Also where did you add the patch, before or after compile?

r00tb33r · 06-28-2008, 09:26 PM

That so called subpixel rendering of colored pixels makes my eyes water... Its that bad. Blowing cigarette smoke in my face isn't nearly as bad.
I like my fonts with AA but no subpixel rendering.
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/148/fontsfv1.png
That's how its done.

Daedra · 06-28-2008, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r00tb33r

That so called subpixel rendering of colored pixels makes my eyes water... Its that bad. Blowing cigarette smoke in my face isn't nearly as bad.
I like my fonts with AA but no subpixel rendering.
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/148/fontsfv1.png
That's how its done.

I can see what your saying, but without the subpixel rendering they just look to soft to me. I prefer subpixel rendering, but I also like the old bytecode nonAA rendering too, I didn't include that into my howto because it seems so few have CRTs now, most people have switched to LCD.

r00tb33r · 06-29-2008, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daedra

I can see what your saying, but without the subpixel rendering they just look to soft to me. I prefer subpixel rendering, but I also like the old bytecode nonAA rendering too, I didn't include that into my howto because it seems so few have CRTs now, most people have switched to LCD.

Hmm, now that I think about it, it will look even worse on a CRT. Meaning I've been using LCDs for many years now. Perhaps it needs tuning for my current monitor, like the color order in a pixel, but I've played with that before, and none of the combinations produced a result I would be happy with. I definitely have to have AA on text at all times though, I even went the length of doing a GTK+ 1 hack, although I don't use that many of GTK+ 1 apps anymore.
NonAA renderings have their purpose... But not in a browser.
Matter of taste I guess. It didn't seem like a biggie back in Win 98 days where I had a choice of nonAA and nonAA.