Sign in to add a comment
|
Ugly font rendering on linux | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reported by marek.ma...@gmail.com, Jun 2 2009 | Back to list | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Chrome Version : 3.0.183.0 (Developer Build 17398) URLs (if applicable) : any Other browsers tested: Firefox 3.0 OK What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. open http://en.wikipedia.org/ or any other website What is the expected result? ugly fonts are being rendered What happens instead? fonts should be correctly rendered see screenshot for Chromium and Firefox screenshot Please provide any additional information below. Attach a screenshot if possible.
Comment 1
by
venkataramana@chromium.org,
Jun 2 2009
,
Jun 3 2009
Hi, thank you for your report, can you please clarify what you mean by "Ugly font"? I couldn't tell from the screenshot, and what OS are you running Chrome on?
,
Jun 4 2009
I am using Chromium alpha on Fedora 10 (GNU/Linux). Chromium uses wrong / incorrect rendering engine which makes font being rendered differently - as if chromium used it's own rendering engine and ignored my desktop settings. See another screenshots attached - Chromium renders font differently.
,
Jun 9 2009
,
Jun 9 2009
Same problem on Ubuntu 9.04. I use antialiasing for best font rendering, but it seems Chromium don't use it.
,
Jun 13 2009
Chromium does not do subpixel rendering in the browser window (it does use it in the location bar and other GTK-rendered areas). It also ignores the desktop font hinting settings. Even though the perceived quality of font rendering is a very subjective field rendering in the browser area is generally sub-par compared to what a well- configured Gnome desktop offers - I say Gnome because that is what I use. The combination of greyscale antialiasing and strong hinting which is used in the browser are in Chromium leads to unbalanced and disfigured fonts as can be seen in the attached screenshots. The first is made using Chromium, the second using Firefox (3.5) on a Gnome desktop (Ubuntu Karmic) with hinting turned off. The small fixed font in Chromium seems to be a separate bug but it does bring out one of the problems with the font rendering: the characters are squashed because they are forced into the pixel grid. The combination of the forced pixel grid (leading to dark, straight edges on characters which have horizontal and/or vertical features) with the greyscale rendering (leading to fuzzy rendering on non-straight features) looks unbalanced. This is what a Gnome desktop used to look like when the Xrender extension had just been introduced to make anti-aliased font rendering possible. In the intervening years the rendering on the desktop has been improved a lot so Chromium sort of stands out like a sore thumb on a modern desktop...
,
Jun 13 2009
Thank you. We're aware that fonts in the renderers differ from the rest of the Desktop. GTK doesn't function in the renderers so we handle the fonts directly, via freetype. It's a known desiderata.
,
Jun 14 2009
I suggest having a look at Arora (Qt-based, http://code.google.com/p/arora/) and Midori (GTK-based, http://www.twotoasts.de/index.php?/pages/midori_summary.html) for examples of Webkit-based browsers which do get font rendering right on Linux. Attached are two screenshots of the same file as used in the Chromium and Firefox screenshots I posted before. The first was made using Arora, the second with Midori. They look strikingly similar to each-other and to the Firefox screenshot while there is a world of difference between these three and the Chromium example.
,
Jun 14 2009
I'm afraid that GTK doesn't function in the renderers and we don't use Qt, so we couldn't benefit from studing either of those two examples. I'm aware that it would be nice if user font preferences were piped though the stack and respected. It's just that there are only 24 hours in the day. Cheers
,
Jun 14 2009
> I'm afraid that GTK doesn't function in the renderers and we don't use Qt, so we couldn't benefit from studing either of those two examples. Could you read again the post before? there were two examples - one qt-webkit and gtk-webkit, both used desktop settings. as see it, chromium is gtk-webkit, so... you could use one this examples as a reference work, couldn't you?
,
Jun 14 2009
No, Chromium has its own port of WebKit. There's no problem knowing /what/ has to done, it's the doing which takes longer.
,
Jun 15 2009
,
Jun 22 2009
issue confirmed on Ubuntu 9.04
,
Jun 26 2009
Yes also I have the same issue on Ubuntu 9.04. :(
,
Jul 12 2009
Hello. I'm currently running Chromium 3.0.194.0(0) on Ubuntu 9.04 and immediately noticed how bad font rendering is when compared to Midori (which is another webkit GTK browser) and Firefox. As much as I love Chromium, the current style of font rendering is a deal breaker for myself.
,
Jul 12 2009
I have the same issue on Ubuntu 8.04.
,
Jul 16 2009
Sadly this doesn't show any change, despite getting a daily update the rendering is unchanged (using Ubuntu Jaunty 9.04 with Compiz compositing enabled). Is any kind of fix in the pipeline for this?
,
Jul 16 2009
This is an in-progress build of Chromium on Linux. The following significant chunks of functionality are known to be missing:................... Different types of font renderering (please stop filing bugs about this) Wow, okay - very sorry (can't delete my previous post!!! hopefully somebody else might hesitate before posting)
,
Jul 16 2009
The state of this bug: the code in Skia for rendering the different hinting levels and subpixel (RGB, BGR) X (Horiz, Vert) types is done, as are the blitters in C code for black and opaque. It needs a significant cleanup pass in order to allow Skia to be built in either configuration (with or without) because not all users of Skia want this extra code. Then we need to plumb down from the GTK mainloop, where we get XSETTINGS updates, via a broadcast to all renderers (and this will be the first such message I believe, so that needs to be designed too), over the IPC system into WebKit everywhere to trigger a invalidation and repaint when the settings change. Of course, hinting programs can move the glyph control points, so that could require a reflow as well, which is painful to code. At first I'm going to try without and see what the result look like. This code is behind complex text and sandboxing issues in the pipeline. Best estimate: 2 weeks.
,
Jul 21 2009
Issue confirmed on Linux Mint 7.
,
Jul 27 2009
The problem is solved with the latest build on Ubuntu 8.04.
,
Jul 31 2009
I'm running 3.0.197.0~svn20090731r22152-0ubuntu1~ucd1~intrepid 0, and my HTML still looks fuzzy -- it's not paying attention to ~/.fonts.conf .
,
Jul 31 2009
Please file a new bug using the linux template and follow the instructions there.
,
Aug 1 2009
It seems that this has been fixed. Running the latest Chromium on Linux Mint 7.Most sites seem OK now, including wikipedia.
,
Aug 1 2009
The font rendering in Chromium is much better, but it still doesn't pick up correct settings from the environment, see screenshot attached - Firefox uses subpixel rendering while Chromium doesn't (screenshot taken from pl.wikipedia.org, in Firefox page was forced to use Arial - same as in Chromium, both scaled up 3x)
,
Aug 1 2009
See comment 23.
,
Aug 1 2009
could you explain me why do I need to file new bug report when the this issue is still not solved?
,
Aug 3 2009
marek.matulka: we pickup the font config from XSETTINGS, we ignore fonts.conf for many things at the moment (inc hinting/subpixel settings). Personally, I've no plans to work on that at the moment. You mention that you're running Fedora: Fedora's FreeType library is compiled without subpixel support, so we don't do subpixel on Fedora. I'm aware that some other applications use subpixel mode on Fedora, I can only imagine that they're doing their own subpixel rendering from the splines. We certainly don't. The easy solution is to find an RPM for FreeType which includes subpixel support.
,
Oct 7 2009
Subpixel support is covered by Microsoft's ClearType patents, which is why we don't enable it.
,
Oct 7 2009
So Chromium for Linux will not have subpixel rendering or will not be enabled by default? Same in Ubuntu as well!? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fontconfig/+bug/34937
,
Oct 7 2009
agl: somehow my Fedora does support subpixel rendering, see file attached (enlarged 400%) so I would expect Chromium to support it as well. And, surprisingly, I must say, current build does support subpixel rendering. So I am confused now :) I must admit too, that I really like the fact Chromium by default uses Times New Roman and Arial rather than sans-serif / serif (default for Firefox on linux).
,
Nov 10 2009
agl: so if you ignore fonts.conf, how will I go about enabling subpixel for Chrome 4.0.237.0? BTW, great work. If anyone is using Ubuntu 9.04 and would care to enlighten us on how to read the settings from .fonts.conf, I'd be grateful. I have very sensitive eyes.
,
Nov 10 2009
subpixel settings are taken from the XSETTINGS property. On GNOME, at least, this is controlled by gnome-appearance-properties. (Although you do have to restart Chrome after changing that.)
,
Nov 10 2009
for reference this is my .fonts.conf http://pastebin.com/f76a7b017.
,
Dec 3 2009
I use KDE 4.3 and chromium fonts look ugly and broken. Looking just fine in other browsers. Seems issue is missing subpixel rendering.
,
Dec 8 2009
I can confirm that web sites (menus and url bar fonts are like they should be) fonts are indeed blurry and fuzzy. Fedora 12 with KDE 4.3 here.
,
Dec 9 2009
I can confirm this as well on Ubuntu 9.10 with latest updates as of today.
,
Dec 11 2009
I have the same issue on a default install of Ubuntu 9.10 with the latest Chromium (4.0.249.30). Fonts look nowhere near as nice as Firefox. They are anti-aliased but they look over hinted.
,
Dec 13 2009
Anyone know, how to solve this issue (ugly font on linux)? I have same problem on debian/amd64/linux.
,
Dec 30 2009
Same problem here. I played with ~/.fonts.conf, change default fonts in chromium/google chrome.
,
Jan 20 2010
Allow me to explain my situation. I want to use hint-slight for all the fonts besides dejavu sans mono, which I want to render as hint-full. Now, if I set it to hint-slight (in gnome-appearance-properties) and do hint-full for dejavu sans mono (I tried appending book aswell) in .fonts.conf it still doesn't work, i.e., explicitly overriding it doesn't work. Going the other way, setting it to hint-full in gnome-appearance-properties and settings the fonts I'd like to render in hint-slight still doesn't work. I'd appreciate it if someone could provide a workaround.
,
Jan 23 2010
The easy thing would be for Chromium to recognise .fonts.conf and problem solved, but it seems the devs like watching us squabble over hackish workarounds.
,
Jan 24 2010
(Unsubscribing from duplicate bug.)
,
Feb 19 2010
Same issue here, Chromium 5.0.307.9 renders ugly font in comparison to Firefox.
,
Feb 22 2010
The same thing happens between Google Chrome and Chromium (last version from the PPA). In chrome the fonts looks better than chromium (strange space between the letters). Using Lucida Sans from sans-serif and Lucida Console from monotype.
,
Mar 26 2010
suddenly chromium started to render fonts incorrectly - it used to work fine for a while, it's back to the initial state, where chromium ignored font settings :(
,
Mar 26 2010
screenshot showing current (5.0.360.0 dev) behaviour, chromium on the left, firefox on the right - as you can easily see, chromium ignores font settings :-(
,
Apr 5 2010
I've been on vacation for a week, but came back to find 5.0.366.2 (Official Build 43280) dev showing what appears to be subpixel antialasing with full hinting, while my gnome font preferences are for slight hinting. The result is text rendered very narrow and light compared to how it used to be. That seems to be consistent with the screenshot attached in comment 48; the chromium window on the left does show subpixel antialiasing (as opposed to the one in the original bug report which shows grayscale).
,
Apr 27 2010
I recently upgraded to Lucid and developed this problem. If you turn off subpixel smoothing (and choose, say "Best Contrast"), the fonts look better. I noticed that this same is true with the Epiphany browser, so perhaps this is a webkit issue.
,
May 2 2010
Hello. I'm afraid my question may sound a bit out of place here, but here it is, please feel free to point me to a better place to ask it. I was trying to get pixel (bitmap fonts) to be used as default fonts for sans, sans- serif and mono-space. I do have those fonts, and other GTK apps can use them. They also appear selectable from the font choosing dialog, however, I cannot apply them :( Any time I do so, they would switch back to the "original" values, which are the fonts with outlines, and thus aliased (using subpixel rendering). I haven't followed the entire discussion, but it seems like the issue is unresolved. So, is this kind of support even planned? (BTW, the UI controls can render those fonts pretty well, it's only the browser control itself that doesn't). I do realize it may not be the most common demand, however, if it's not really difficult, please keep that in mind :) Thanks for otherwise a very good browser :)
,
May 4 2010
now the bug has went to the beta build, google-chrome became unusable for me.
,
May 4 2010
Fonts were excellent on version 4, but the new v5 beta released today is UGLY. Chrome had become my favorite Linux browser, but now considering going back to Firefox.
,
May 5 2010
The new 5.0.375.29 beta brings the same font rendering issue, and font looks ugly in linux My Distro: Linux Mint 8 Regards,
,
May 5 2010
It has been Ugly in Linux from start. If you use it inside of KDE and use MS fonts like verdana, it shows horrible. It has been never understood KDEs font settigs.
,
May 5 2010
I uses gnome, and previous oficial beta release the fonts were displayed fine. I can't understand why in each realease appears the same problem Regards, again
,
May 5 2010
Same problem here: With the latest beta, fonts are so ugly that there are almost unreadable. Here's how this page looks like: http://yfrog.com/66screenshot2vp
,
May 5 2010
the same font rendering issue take place in Debian 5.
,
May 6 2010
This was broken in beta by the May 4, 2010 upgrade:
committing changes in /etc after apt run
Package changes:
-google-chrome-beta 5.0.342.9-r43360
+google-chrome-beta 5.0.375.29-r46008
If I downgrade to 5.0.342.9-r43360 then it looks fine again.
Environment:
Ubuntu Karmic, 32-bit, up-to-date (May 6, 2010):
root@amy:/etc# apt-show-versions | fgrep -v /karmic
google-chrome-beta/stable upgradeable from 5.0.342.9-r43360 to 5.0.375.29-r46008
libdvdnav4 4.1.3-3ubuntu1 newer than version in archive
xfce4-power-manager 0.8.4-1ubuntu1.1 newer than version in archive
xfce4-power-manager-data 0.8.4-1ubuntu1.1 newer than version in archive
root@amy:/etc# apt-show-versions | egrep 'libgtk|gconf'
compizconfig-backend-gconf/karmic uptodate 0.8.4-0ubuntu1
gconf-defaults-service/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu2
gconf-editor/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu1
gconf2/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu2
gconf2-common/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu2
libgconf2-4/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu2
libgconf2-dev/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu2
libgconf2.0-cil/karmic uptodate 2.24.1-4ubuntu1
libgtk-vnc-1.0-0/karmic uptodate 0.3.9-1ubuntu2
libgtk2-perl/karmic uptodate 1:1.221-4
libgtk2.0-0/karmic uptodate 2.18.3-1ubuntu2.2
libgtk2.0-bin/karmic uptodate 2.18.3-1ubuntu2.2
libgtk2.0-cil/karmic uptodate 2.12.9-1
libgtk2.0-common/karmic uptodate 2.18.3-1ubuntu2.2
libgtk2.0-dev/karmic uptodate 2.18.3-1ubuntu2.2
libgtkhtml2-0/karmic uptodate 2.11.1-2ubuntu2
libgtkmathview0c2a/karmic uptodate 0.8.0-3ubuntu2
libgtkmm-2.4-1c2a/karmic uptodate 1:2.18.2-1
libgtksourceview2.0-0/karmic uptodate 2.8.1-1
libgtksourceview2.0-common/karmic uptodate 2.8.1-1
libgtkspell0/karmic uptodate 2.0.15-0ubuntu1
pulseaudio-module-gconf/karmic uptodate 1:0.9.19-0ubuntu4.1
python-gconf/karmic uptodate 2.28.0-0ubuntu1
root@amy:/etc#
,
May 7 2010
Problem solved on Gnome-Gentoo. I enable system 10-sub-pixel-rgb.conf and all work :)
,
May 7 2010
Confirm @netcelli method in Ubuntu 9.10 cd /etc/fonts/conf.d/ sudo ln -s ../conf.avail/10-sub-pixel-rgb.conf . See my screenshot (PS: I'm using Mac4Lin themes in ubuntu)
,
May 8 2010
I have been using Chrome in Ubuntu for a while with great fonts. I upgraded to 10.04 today, got the latest version of Chrome installed, and the fonts are so blurry that I can't stand to look at them for more than a few seconds. The method described above involving 10-sub-pixel-rgb.conf did not help me.
,
May 8 2010
Are we talking about Chrome or Chromium?
,
May 9 2010
we are talking about the chrome browser in linux system.
,
May 9 2010
Chromium 6.0.400.0 (46793) Ubuntu has solved the issue of ugly font rendering for me
,
May 9 2010
Sorry, false alarm - font rendering still sucketh...-( http://goo.gl/lpLQ
,
May 11 2010
package updated, but no improvement anyway...
,
May 14 2010
on my Ubuntu I checked the serif font with fc-match -v serif. It appears that I had some windows fonts in /usr/share/fonts/truetype. I delete those and now it uses DejaVu
,
May 31 2010
When I upgraded to Lucid Lynx, I installed Google Chrome instead of Chromium Browser - mistakenly. And I thought the fonts problems is finally taken care of. I was so happy, I made it my default browser and even started using it as my default development environment. Everything was going fine. Suddenly the browser started crashing too often. I tried uninstalling/reinstalling and everything I could; but nothing helped. I was thinking Google Chrome is a 'stable' version of Chromium Browser; but it doesn't look so. Finally, I removed Google Chrome and installed Chromium Browser. And I'm back to square one with this Fonts problem. I can see this thread started on June 2009 - almost a year back. I have no option but to go back to Firefox. I consider this fonts issue is a 'blocker' level bug and can not imagine it not having fixed for as long as a year.
,
Jun 9 2010
Same issue here. I really like Chrome, but won't use it because I really miss subpixel rasterized fonts. All applications look fine and pick up the correct settings ... except Chrome.
,
Jun 11 2010
The same stuff on openSuse 11.2 x64
,
Jul 8 2010
The font rendering seemed to be better for a while but it's certainly broken now. I'm using 64 bit Fedora 13 with Chromium 6.0.453.1 dev and it's unusable, the font rendering is hideous. When are you going to fix this?
,
Jul 17 2010
latest update (5.0.375.99 (51029) Ubuntu 10.04) fixed the issue for me -- thanks!!! Ubuntu Lucid 64
,
Aug 4 2010
Same issue here with Fedora 12 after updatingfrom beta to 5.0.375.125 stable version. My eyes can't stand these sharp fonts unfortunately.
,
Aug 5 2010
P.S. I installed back 5.0.307.7 beta (not from the repos but downloaded) and it works OK for me. I have AJAX issues (Gmail, Wave and few else load from third time), but at least it's not that ugly.
,
Aug 15 2010
With the stable channel 5.0.375.126 (and the previous 5.x beta), font rendering is very nice on Fedora 12. Note that I have truetype core fonts installed, and freetype-freeworld installed. However, when I updated to the recent beta 6.x release 6.0.472.33, Chrome began to render fonts poorly -- similar to the screenshots shown by various people in this report. I also tested the unstable version 6.0.490.1 and still had the ugly font rendering with that version.
,
Aug 22 2010
What used to be a gorgeously rendered Google Chrome, now renders terribly on OpenSUSE 11.2/x86-64 as shown on the screenshot below. Other fonts everywhere else are a hodge podge of fonts, like even this form:
,
Sep 2 2010
Just updated to Chrome 6 und Fedora 12 and I also see ugly rendering, much worse than previously. Especially Chrome seems to have lost the ability to render bold Umlaut-Characters like üöäß.
,
Sep 3 2010
Font rendering is broken between Google Chrome 5.0.375.127 and 6.0.472.53 on Linux/amd64. Attached screenshots show example.
,
Sep 3 2010
Updating FreeType configuration caused font rendering to revert to same as Google Chrome 5.0.375.127: # cd /etc/fonts/conf.d/ # ln -s ../conf.avail/10-no-sub-pixel.conf ../conf.avail/10-unhinted.conf .
,
Sep 8 2010
There is a difference between 6.0.417.0 and 6.0.486.0 as provided by the Fedora Project. I am running Fedora 13 x86_64 with the Fedora-supplied Chromium RPM packages. I have the same issue where fonts appear rendered "correctly" in the older version but are "ugly" or rendered improperly when running anything newer that 6.0.417. I will attempt the suggested fix in Comment 81 and report back if it resolved my issue.
,
Sep 8 2010
I've tried a "fix" from comment #81 - it made all fonts on my desktop look crap, did improve fonts in Chrome a bit, but not much.
,
Sep 8 2010
The Fix in Comment #81 did help the font rendering in Chromium. I had to tweak the font settings a slight bit in my GNOME Terminal and in the System-->Preferences-->Appearance-->Fonts Tab but everything is acceptable now. Still, Chromium/Chrome should render fonts exactly the same from version to version without having to change the system fonts configuration.
,
Oct 8 2010
google-chrome-beta-7.0.517.36-61761 is still ugly for me v5 was fine.
,
Nov 16 2010
Same problem here Fedora 13 x86-64 Google Chrome 7.0.517.44 Will back to firefox until it's fixed. There is blood in my eyes!
,
Dec 6 2010
Still the same problem on Ubuntu 10.10 with CHROME 8.0.552.215
,
Dec 11 2010
this issue is ignored?
,
Dec 12 2010
The same pronlem on Debian.
,
Dec 15 2010
Still ugly on fedora 12, please fix this asap.
,
Jan 20 2011
the issue here and on bug 12179 appears to be either DUPLICATE or FIXED, but none works with most recent versions. Font hinting is still wrong, and searching over the forums and help pages does not help.
,
Jan 24 2011
my issue was successfully resolved here: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=70262#c2
,
Nov 6 2011
I was able to resolve this for the Chromium in Debian Squeeze (Chromium 6.x) using the configuration labelled "Quick and Easy" from this page: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Font_Configuration#Quick_and_Easy It involves modifications to /etc/fonts/conf.avail/51-local.conf.
,
Mar 6 2012
I was able to resolve this by installing FreeType with Subpixel support on Fedora 16. I installed this older package: http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/11522087/dir/fedora_other/com/freetype-freeworld-2.3.8-1.fc11.i386.rpm.html
,
Apr 17 2012
Resolved it on Debian 6.04: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=70262#c4
,
Oct 13 2012
This issue has been closed for some time. No one will pay attention to new comments. If you are seeing this bug or have new data, please click New Issue to start a new bug.
,
Mar 11 2013
,
Apr 6 2013
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ► Sign in to add a comment | ||||||||||||||||||||||||