tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19780926.post7567232153662013329..comments2022-03-22T09:51:14.570-07:00Comments on baudline signal analyzer: Fedora 8 vs. openSUSE 10.3 vs. Ubuntu 7.10baudlinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01107499364088162542noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19780926.post-60945717328103593792007-12-10T15:12:00.000-08:002007-12-10T15:12:00.000-08:00You can check if your distribution has the missing...You can check if your distribution has the missing fonts that baudline requires by running the following command line sequence:<BR/><BR/>xlsfonts | grep helvetica | grep "r-normal--12-"<BR/><BR/>If the output looks something like:<BR/><BR/>-adobe-helvetica-bold-r-normal--12-120-75-75-p-70-iso8859-1<BR/>-adobe-helvetica-medium-r-normal--12-120-75-75-p-67-iso8859-1<BR/><BR/>then the bold and medium 12 point helvetica fonts that caused the problems in the live-CD survey are correctly installed. These helvetica fonts have been included as standard default on all major Linux distributions for the past 10 years so it is surprising that 2 of the 3 live-CD's tested here lacked them. The fonts are fairly small in size but it's possible that the distro makers were trying to save on disk space?<BR/><BR/>Baudline also uses the 5x7, 6x13, 7x13, 8x13, 10x20, 14 point helvetica, 40 point "bitstream charter" fixed size fonts and the "bitstream courier 10 pitch" scalable font. So it would be a good idea to test for them too if any baudline text is missing or looks incorrect.baudlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07832400327518236821noreply@blogger.com