On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 18:23 +, Nix wrote:
> I said:
> > 1.5: EXA, 16, AA: dixLookupPrivate 23.17
> > generally much faster than XAA, occasionally degrades
> > to
> > XAA speed
> > 1.5: EXA, 24, AA: dixLookupPrivate 26.83
> > 1.6: EXA, 16,
I said:
> 1.5: EXA, 16, AA: dixLookupPrivate 23.17
> generally much faster than XAA, occasionally degrades to
> XAA speed
> 1.5: EXA, 24, AA: dixLookupPrivate 26.83
> 1.6: EXA, 16, AA: exaBufferGlyph 5.74 (X: 49.42); xterm: 9.48; kernel:
> 20
On 09:33 Thu 05 Feb , Colin Guthrie wrote:
> 'Twas brillig, and Michel Dänzer at 05/02/09 08:15 did gyre and gimble:
> > On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 00:29 +, Nix wrote:
> >> augh! blasted --disable-builtin-fonts, why isn't it the default?
> >
> > It's gone in Git master, the builtins are always
'Twas brillig, and Michel Dänzer at 05/02/09 08:15 did gyre and gimble:
> On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 00:29 +, Nix wrote:
>> augh! blasted --disable-builtin-fonts, why isn't it the default?
>
> It's gone in Git master, the builtins are always available as a fallback
> for the real FontPath now. Ther
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 00:29 +, Nix wrote:
>
> augh! blasted --disable-builtin-fonts, why isn't it the default?
It's gone in Git master, the builtins are always available as a fallback
for the real FontPath now. There's discussion about merging this nice
solution for 1.6.
> but the most sign
On 3 Feb 2009, Dan Nicholson uttered the following:
> The output isn't quite what I'd expect, but I think this is because
> it's using the builtin fonts only. Try rebuilding the server with
> --disable-builtin-fonts, or apply this patch that's a candidate for
augh! blasted --disable-builtin-fonts,
On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 23:26 +, Nix wrote:
>
> [dix] Could not init font path element /usr/lib/X11/fonts/OTF, removing from
> list!
>
> It's hard to check the scrolling behaviour of antialiased and fixed-point text
> when the only font you have is 'fixed' :)
Well, FWIW this only affects core
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Nix wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer said:
>
>> On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:59 +, Nix wrote:
>>> On 30 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer stated:
>>> >Trying current xf86-video-ati Git might be good, but my main suggestion
>>> >would be to try xserver Git server-1.6-bra
On 31 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer said:
> On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:59 +, Nix wrote:
>> On 30 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer stated:
>> >Trying current xf86-video-ati Git might be good, but my main suggestion
>> >would be to try xserver Git server-1.6-branch with EXA.
>>
>> OK. Do I need to upgrade Mesa
Le Lun 2 février 2009 00:23, Nix a écrit :
>> I think the Fedora 12 cycle will probably start by mass bug-filling
>> against apps that need those symlinks.
>
> The annoying pedant in me looks at the 'exposing all our fonts' goal
> and
> wonders how you're planning to expose metafont fonts in fon
On 1 Feb 2009, Nicolas Mailhot uttered the following:
> From a distribution point of view, apps which use fontconfig almost
> never present problems (because fontconfig will do all kinds of smart
> stuff like substituting missing fonts transparently), while apps that
> use core fonts have a long co
Le dimanche 01 février 2009 à 12:54 +, Nix a écrit :
> On 31 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer outgrape:
> > I think a big part of the motivation for client side fonts was indeed
> > anti-aliasing, so if you don't want AA and core fonts are faster for
> > you, just use core fonts?
>
> That's Not really
On 31 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer outgrape:
> On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:59 +, Nix wrote:
>> On 30 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer stated:
>> >Trying current xf86-video-ati Git might be good, but my main suggestion
>> >would be to try xserver Git server-1.6-branch with EXA.
>>
>> OK. Do I need to upgrade Me
On Sat, 2009-01-31 at 15:58 +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> I think a big part of the motivation for client side fonts was indeed
> anti-aliasing, so if you don't want AA and core fonts are faster for
> you, just use core fonts?
>
Actually, the data showed that start up time was terribly affect
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 21:59 +, Nix wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer stated:
> >Trying current xf86-video-ati Git might be good, but my main suggestion
> >would be to try xserver Git server-1.6-branch with EXA.
>
> OK. Do I need to upgrade Mesa or anything related at the same time?
> (I'
On 30 Jan 2009, Michel Dänzer stated:
>Trying current xf86-video-ati Git might be good, but my main suggestion
>would be to try xserver Git server-1.6-branch with EXA.
OK. Do I need to upgrade Mesa or anything related at the same time?
(I'm currently on libdrm 2.4.1, Mesa a few commits past 7.2.0
On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 21:16 +, Nix wrote:
> I'm posting this here rather than reporting this on bz mainly because
> something very similar has been reported on this list by at least one
> other person in the past few months[1]: at the time, the assumption was
> that this was Intel-card- related
On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 23:02 +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
> > Are you using the same version of kde on both systems? IIRC kde 4
> > switched to using a1 surfaces for font rendering which isn't currently
> > accelerated by EXA. Notice the _a1 fetch below.
> I've seen quite many different reports
> Are you using the same version of kde on both systems? IIRC kde 4
> switched to using a1 surfaces for font rendering which isn't currently
> accelerated by EXA. Notice the _a1 fetch below.
I've seen quite many different reports about slow EXA which turned out
to be caused by the A1 mask format
On 29 Jan 2009, Alex Deucher uttered the following:
> Are you using the same version of kde on both systems? IIRC kde 4
> switched to using a1 surfaces for font rendering which isn't currently
> accelerated by EXA. Notice the _a1 fetch below.
No change there: KDE 3.5.9 across the board, although
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Nix wrote:
> I'm posting this here rather than reporting this on bz mainly because
> something very similar has been reported on this list by at least one
> other person in the past few months[1]: at the time, the assumption was
> that this was Intel-card- related.
21 matches
Mail list logo
