After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 647313 - Text tool using sub-pixel anti-aliasing for text inside images
Text tool using sub-pixel anti-aliasing for text inside images
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 657047
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: General
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2011-04-09 20:42 UTC by Franz Glauber Vanderlinde
Modified: 2011-08-27 15:17 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Franz Glauber Vanderlinde 2011-04-09 20:42:11 UTC
My KDE settings were using sub-pixel anti-aliasing, and this caused some odd color issues when inserting text on an image. 

$ gimp -v

GNU Image Manipulation Program version 2.7.2
git-describe: GIMP_2_7_1-1748-g7415ef3

using GEGL version 0.1.6 (compiled against version 0.1.6)
using GLib version 2.28.5 (compiled against version 2.28.5)
using GdkPixbuf version 2.22.1 (compiled against version 2.22.1)
using GTK+ version 2.24.3 (compiled against version 2.24.3)
using Pango version 1.28.3 (compiled against version 1.28.3)
using Fontconfig version 2.8.0 (compiled against version 2.8.0)
using Cairo version 1.10.2 (compiled against version 1.10.2)
Comment 1 Franz Glauber Vanderlinde 2011-04-09 20:44:07 UTC
A screenshot to demonstrate:

http://img196.imageshack.us/i/weirdfonts.png/
Comment 2 Michael Schumacher 2011-08-26 09:42:23 UTC
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find.

Resolving as a duplicate of the newer bug because there's a better description of the cause.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 657047 ***
Comment 3 Franz Glauber Vanderlinde 2011-08-27 11:21:01 UTC
So, it is acceptable to mark newer tickets as duplicated. How can I have reported a duplicated bug 3 months BEFORE bug 657047? Sigh...
Comment 4 Franz Glauber Vanderlinde 2011-08-27 11:21:27 UTC
Sorry, 4 months.
Comment 5 Martin Nordholts 2011-08-27 14:27:34 UTC
*** Bug 657047 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Martin Nordholts 2011-08-27 15:17:48 UTC
Sorry, I shouldn't have reversed the duplication. It makes sense to duplicate against newer bugs if the newer bug better describes the problem.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 657047 ***