Fontawesome style: Solid, regular, light
Is it possible to specify the style for font awesome:?
For example, faAlignJustify has three different styles:
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=light
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=regular
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=solid
fontawesome
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
add a comment |
Is it possible to specify the style for font awesome:?
For example, faAlignJustify has three different styles:
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=light
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=regular
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=solid
fontawesome
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
add a comment |
Is it possible to specify the style for font awesome:?
For example, faAlignJustify has three different styles:
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=light
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=regular
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=solid
fontawesome
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
Is it possible to specify the style for font awesome:?
For example, faAlignJustify has three different styles:
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=light
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=regular
https://origin.fontawesome.com/icons/align-justify?style=solid
fontawesome
fontawesome
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
asked Dec 2 '18 at 17:54
Rod
1485
1485
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The fontawesome5 package offers the possibility to specify solid or regular as an optional argument, solid is the default:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{fontawesome5}
begin{document}
faFile
faFile*
faFile[regular]
faFile*[regular]
faFile[solid]
faFile*[solid]
end{document}
According to the documentation, the light style is also available in the with the pro version of the package (only compatible with xelatex or lualatex)
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f462838%2ffontawesome-style-solid-regular-light%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The fontawesome5 package offers the possibility to specify solid or regular as an optional argument, solid is the default:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{fontawesome5}
begin{document}
faFile
faFile*
faFile[regular]
faFile*[regular]
faFile[solid]
faFile*[solid]
end{document}
According to the documentation, the light style is also available in the with the pro version of the package (only compatible with xelatex or lualatex)
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
add a comment |
The fontawesome5 package offers the possibility to specify solid or regular as an optional argument, solid is the default:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{fontawesome5}
begin{document}
faFile
faFile*
faFile[regular]
faFile*[regular]
faFile[solid]
faFile*[solid]
end{document}
According to the documentation, the light style is also available in the with the pro version of the package (only compatible with xelatex or lualatex)
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
add a comment |
The fontawesome5 package offers the possibility to specify solid or regular as an optional argument, solid is the default:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{fontawesome5}
begin{document}
faFile
faFile*
faFile[regular]
faFile*[regular]
faFile[solid]
faFile*[solid]
end{document}
According to the documentation, the light style is also available in the with the pro version of the package (only compatible with xelatex or lualatex)
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
The fontawesome5 package offers the possibility to specify solid or regular as an optional argument, solid is the default:
documentclass{article}
usepackage{fontawesome5}
begin{document}
faFile
faFile*
faFile[regular]
faFile*[regular]
faFile[solid]
faFile*[solid]
end{document}
According to the documentation, the light style is also available in the with the pro version of the package (only compatible with xelatex or lualatex)
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
answered Dec 2 '18 at 18:24
book
700112
700112
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
add a comment |
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
Thank you. It seems I was using an older fontawesome version. Actually am having some issues trying to install it in my debian.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 18:34
1
1
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
@Rod If you ditch the texlive version from debian and install the one available from tug.org you will the newest version of all packages
– book
Dec 2 '18 at 18:35
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
I'm migrating my container to Debian sid, it seems it includes the newest versions. If I could not get it to work easily, certainly, I will use your approach and get the newest from tug.org Again, many thanks.
– Rod
Dec 2 '18 at 19:04
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f462838%2ffontawesome-style-solid-regular-light%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
