(Huw?)
Do I need to dig deeper to understand this or is there a defect in the logic. If there are ttf fonts available does that mean a poor ttf match will be selected even when a better x11drv font is available?
Note that my font knowledge is quite minimal
Context When I installed our product on a clean Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 test machine it looked relatively acceptable. However on my own development machine (again RHEL3) for several texts the font was too large and overflowed the area that had been allocated for it. Then when I installed on Mandrake 10.0 I noticed the same large fonts.
So I dug.
On my machine (and probably on the Mandrake too; I don't know since I've trashed it) OpenOffice.org is installed. It installs /usr/share/fonts/openoffice, containing Vera*.ttf.
As an example the Splash screen asks for an Arial font. My development machine runs through the fonts it knows about and selects the Bitstream Vera Sans, which is not a good match.
The test machine has no ttf files to work from and so it reverses the Helvetica-Arial substitution (Hm!!! poor registry setup, I reckon) and performs a match for a Helvetica font and finds a much more acceptable font.
So it seems to me that merely because OpenOffice.org has installed a couple of ttf fonts my development machine will select from a small list of ttf fonts and ignore a large list of x11 fonts.
Am I correct? What should we do? Get the font matching logic to look at both the sets of fonts? Or add some sort of "Ignore these fonts" list in the Wine fonts area?