Misc. Questions About 10.2
 

1. I understand that a symlink was put in place for 10.2. Was that for Mozilla, Firefox, or both?

2. Do I still have to install, on my own, cabextract and the M$ core web fonts so that the web pages look "better"? I was playing around with 10.1, and I thought that the fonts under Mozilla looked okay, with no extra fonts installed. I remember that the fonts looked ugly in 10.0, which was why I installed the fonts originally.

3. Let's say that I have alsa-driver installed. Then, I recompile the kernel with the same version that came with 10.2 (2.4.31). Will the alsa driver still work with the new kernel?

4. Different scenario: lets's say I have alsa-util, alsa-lib, and alsa-oss installed. Then, let's say I recompile kernel 2.4.31, and compile the source for the alsa driver (as opposed to installing a .tgz). Will the programs under the alsa-util, alsa-lib, and alsa-oss packages still work? Or would it be better to compile the corresponding source?


eə

When installing alsa I compile only the driver from source and follow the instructions provided from alsa.org for my soundcard (Audigy1). Look for instructions for your soundcard at http://www.alsa-project.org/alsa-doc/

Alsa-util and alsa-lib I install from the Slackware CD in .tgz format. When recompiling the kernel I had to also recompile the driver again for my soundcard to work.

As far as fonts go I wasn't impressed with Kde's default rendering. At the moment I'm using Arial 10 (from windows ttf) with anti-aliasing, sub-pixel hinting (greyscale) with full hinting. Looks nice on an LCD. Gnome's default sans rendering (no sub-pixel) looks better though and is what I use in gtk2 apps.

I found that anti-aliased fonts tended to look better at higher resolutions (1280x1024, 17-19 inch lcd's) as there was alot more pixels to render the font in. 1024x768 and below on a crt wasn't so good if anti-aliasing was turned on.