Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-02 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Thu, 2 Feb 2012 10:21:03 +0900 schrieb Vladimir Lomov:


 1. if PDF output is only interesting then it is Ok, ignore that message,
 because font information is already in PDF and PDF programs should deal
 with it;

It doesn't depend on the output format. The checksum of vf and
tfm-files are compared and these files are used by pdflatex too. 


-- 
Ulrike Fischer 

___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-02 Thread Hans Hagen

On 2-2-2012 02:21, Vladimir Lomov wrote:


Correct me if I'm wrong, but this how I understand TFM font and currect
state of tex engines (actually pdftex, xetex and luatex):


sort of wrong


1. to use any font in tex one need a TFM file (file name = fontname.TFM),
that file actually contain informationabout font, not how exatly glyphs
are constructed;


indeed, and when we forget about opentype etc only the tfm is needed


2. when [original] tex read a document file it searches for TFM and VF
files, read them and write DVI file with information about that files;


no, the vf is only needed when the backend (which happens to be included 
in pdftex/luatex) is going to embed the glyph data from the font; only 
then it needs to know of a glyph is actually a virtual one


however, in luatex, due to different internals, vf files are / can be 
read in earlier as the virtual font model is part of the front end


so, it can be in an earlier stage that some mismatch can happen


3. after that user can send file to printer or publisher to print it on
printer. As I understand the purpose of checksum was to be sure that
publisher or printer would use exatly the same fonts as user. If user
converts DVI file to PS/PDF one on his/she computer using dvips or
dvipdfm* the checksum mostly useless, assuming files are not corrupted.


no, the checksum only is some safeguard that vf and tfm match

if you go through dvi then dvips or dvipdfmx read the vf files


Nowadays pdftex, xetex and luatex are widely used and most time users
generate PDF files on the same computer they write documents, send PDF
files which have they own mechanism to check font consistency.

But still there are [plenty] DVI files around, as well as luatex engine
might generate DVI file. The convertion to PS/PDF is performed by
dvips/dvipdfm* programs, that's ok. But what about luatex with DVI
output?


i never use luatex with dvi output


My conclusion:
1. if PDF output is only interesting then it is Ok, ignore that message,
because font information is already in PDF and PDF programs should deal
with it;
2. if DVI output is concerned then luatex _must_ be consistent with
pdftex (also can write DVI files), which, imho (don't check), takes care
about both TFM and VF checksums.


luatex probably is consistent although in most cases the way that it 
deals with fonts (read: the macro package deals with fonts) is different 
from the way it's done with pdftex/xetex


if i had the time i'd probably run a few tests and see where the 
mismatch happens but it has a real low priority for me


Hans

-
  Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
  Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
 | www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-02 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 17:23:09 +0200 schrieb Khaled Hosny:


 I tried printing the tfm table we pass to the backed, and the checksum
 matches the one in the VF file, so this is a bit confusing 

Well I actually don't know what test is actually done (and why
exactly) but some remarks:

1. If I try to convert the binary pplr7t.vf to the readable
vpl-file I need *two* tfm-files: pplr7t.tfm and pplr8r.tfm. 

2. vftovp tells me during the conversion:
   Check sum in VF file being replaced by TFM check sum 
which probably means that the vpl-file doesn't contain the original
checksum(s) of the vf-file.

3. The vpl file contains two checksums:

(CHECKSUM O 25136566211)

and a checksum in the mapfont entry:

(MAPFONT D 0
   (FONTNAME pplr8r)
   (FONTCHECKSUM O 36571141413)
   (FONTAT R 1.0)
   (FONTDSIZE R 10.0)
   )

So which of both is actually checked against which tfm checksum (and
gives the mismatch message)?


Btw: Two years ago I ran against a checksum mismatch message
concerning the width of characters. In this case the culprit was a
different calculation method for tfm and vf:

http://tug.org/mailman/htdig/pdftex/2009-May/008035.html


-- 
Ulrike Fischer 

___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-02 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:54 AM, luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,
 ** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 08:45:18 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
 distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
 them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh 
 --modules=all'.

 Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
 actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
 pdf file).
 Even with --modules=all'
 LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
 and
 $ pdffonts test.pdf

 name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
  - --- --- --- -
 Error: font resource is not a dictionary
 JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular             CID Type 0C       yes yes yes     18  0

 It seems that this font is not a font of the suite.

 Let me stess it in other words: this (Font ... not found) is not the
 topic of thread. It is completely inrelated (IMHO) with vf font
 problem (vf font leads to that checksum message). I took that font
 because it has corresponding vf file.
 ok it was just to have as much data as possible.

 We have

 $vftovp txr.vf
 (VTITLE )
 (FAMILY TXR)
 (FACE F MRR)
 (CODINGSCHEME TEX TEXT)
 (DESIGNSIZE R 10.0)
 (COMMENT DESIGNSIZE IS IN POINTS)
 (COMMENT OTHER SIZES ARE MULTIPLES OF DESIGNSIZE)
 (CHECKSUM O 32212676346)

 while from  luatex source

 source/texk/web2c/luatexdir/font/vfovf.w:
 @ process a local font in \.{VF} file
 @c
 static internal_font_number
 vf_def_font(internal_font_number f, unsigned char *vf_buffer, int *vf_cr)
 {
 :
 unsigned long checksum;
    cs.b0 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr)];
    cs.b1 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 1];
    cs.b2 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 2];
    cs.b3 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 3];
    (*vf_cr) += 4;
    checksum = (unsigned)
        (cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3);
 :

 if (checksum != 0  font_checksum(k) != 0
             checksum != font_checksum(k))
            vf_local_font_warning(f, k, checksum mismatch, (int) checksum,
                                  (int) font_checksum(k));
        if (ds != font_dsize(k))
            vf_local_font_warning(f, k, design size mismatch, ds,
                                  font_dsize(k));

Sorry, it's not the right point:
it's this one:

@ some of these things happen twice, adding a define is simplest

@c
#define test_checksum()  { vf_byte(tmp_b0); vf_byte(tmp_b1);\
vf_byte(tmp_b2); vf_byte(tmp_b3); \
if (((tmp_b0 != 0) || (tmp_b1 != 0) || (tmp_b2 != 0) || (tmp_b3 != 0))  \
  ((font_check_0(f) != 0) || (font_check_1(f) != 0) ||\
   (font_check_2(f) != 0) || (font_check_3(f) != 0))\
  ((tmp_b0 != font_check_0(f)) || (tmp_b1 != font_check_1(f)) ||  \
   (tmp_b2 != font_check_2(f)) || (tmp_b3 != font_check_3(f { \
  print_nlp();  \
  tprint(checksum mismatch in font ); \
  tprint(font_name(f)); \
  tprint(.vf ignored ); } }


-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___

Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-02 Thread luigi scarso
Basically it seems coherent with the luatex manual (ch.  7 Font structure):

luatex read the txr.tfm file and  set the checksum to the unsigned int 0
(luafont.w ,int font_from_lua(lua_State * L, int f)) (but see Note below)
Then read the vf
(dofont.w, do_vf(f) inside static int do_define_font(int f, const char
*cnom, scaled s, int natural_dir))
do_vf(f) calculate the checksum of the vf file vua test_checksum() macro,
and find that the vf file has checksum
 210 43 124 230 =(210*2^24)+(43*2^16)+(124*2^8)+230=3526065382= oct 32212676346
vs
128 0 0 0
and hence the warning of mismatch.


Note:
The last sequence 128 0 0 0  (i.e. 0) it is due to

i = numeric_field(L, checksum, 0);
set_font_checksum(f, (unsigned) i);

where
static int numeric_field(lua_State * L, const char *name, int dflt)
{
int i = dflt;
lua_pushstring(L, name);
lua_rawget(L, -2);
if (lua_isnumber(L, -1)) {
i = lua_roundnumber(L, -1);
}
lua_pop(L, 1);
return i;
}
and
#define lua_roundnumber(a,b) (int)floor((double)lua_tonumber(L,-1)+0.5)

I think one can avoid the warning if set the checksum field to the
correct value by the define_font callback on the lua side.

-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Vladimir Lomov
Hello,
** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 08:45:18 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
 distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
 them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh --modules=all'.

 Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
 actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
 pdf file).
 Even with --modules=all'
 LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
 and
 $ pdffonts test.pdf

 name type  emb sub uni object ID
  - --- --- --- -
 Error: font resource is not a dictionary
 JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular CID Type 0C   yes yes yes 18  0

 It seems that this font is not a font of the suite.

Let me stess it in other words: this (Font ... not found) is not the
topic of thread. It is completely inrelated (IMHO) with vf font
problem (vf font leads to that checksum message). I took that font
because it has corresponding vf file.

The message Font ... not found is on terminal output while checksum
mismatch only in log file.

Ok, IIRC, if I want to use font with plain tex (pdftex engine) I have to
have TFM, and may be VF files, then MF source _or_ type1 font (pfb
file), if I have only type1 font, i.e. pfb+tfm[+vf] files, I must
instruct pdftex to use pfb file for corresponding tfm, this is what MAP
file do, e.g. file 'original-ams-cmr.map':
cmr10   CMR10   cmr10.pfb
(I don't remember the purpose of second column), the first is TFM
file/font, the last one is type1 file (obviously). If there isn't such
entry for a font, pk for is generated from MF source. It MF source is
missing similar message is printed.

---
WBR, Vladimir Lomov

-- 
War isn't a good life, but it's life.
-- Kirk, A Private Little War, stardate 4211.8
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,
 ** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 08:45:18 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
 distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
 them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh 
 --modules=all'.

 Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
 actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
 pdf file).
 Even with --modules=all'
 LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
 and
 $ pdffonts test.pdf

 name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
  - --- --- --- -
 Error: font resource is not a dictionary
 JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular             CID Type 0C       yes yes yes     18  0

 It seems that this font is not a font of the suite.

 Let me stess it in other words: this (Font ... not found) is not the
 topic of thread. It is completely inrelated (IMHO) with vf font
 problem (vf font leads to that checksum message). I took that font
 because it has corresponding vf file.
ok it was just to have as much data as possible.

We have

$vftovp txr.vf
(VTITLE )
(FAMILY TXR)
(FACE F MRR)
(CODINGSCHEME TEX TEXT)
(DESIGNSIZE R 10.0)
(COMMENT DESIGNSIZE IS IN POINTS)
(COMMENT OTHER SIZES ARE MULTIPLES OF DESIGNSIZE)
(CHECKSUM O 32212676346)

while from  luatex source

source/texk/web2c/luatexdir/font/vfovf.w:
@ process a local font in \.{VF} file
@c
static internal_font_number
vf_def_font(internal_font_number f, unsigned char *vf_buffer, int *vf_cr)
{
:
unsigned long checksum;
cs.b0 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr)];
cs.b1 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 1];
cs.b2 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 2];
cs.b3 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 3];
(*vf_cr) += 4;
checksum = (unsigned)
(cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3);
:

if (checksum != 0  font_checksum(k) != 0
 checksum != font_checksum(k))
vf_local_font_warning(f, k, checksum mismatch, (int) checksum,
  (int) font_checksum(k));
if (ds != font_dsize(k))
vf_local_font_warning(f, k, design size mismatch, ds,
  font_dsize(k));


It's not related to MKIV but to luatex, and it's a warning.
It doesn't even matter to have --modules==all, this vf file  in the
standard standalone.
Of course you must have the pfb/afm or otf or ttf file, as usual,
otherwise the pdf is wrong

-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___

Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Vladimir Lomov
Hello,
** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 10:54:04 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,
 ** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 08:45:18 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
 distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
 them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh 
 --modules=all'.

 Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
 actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
 pdf file).
 Even with --modules=all'
 LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
 and
 $ pdffonts test.pdf

 name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
  - --- --- --- -
 Error: font resource is not a dictionary
 JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular             CID Type 0C       yes yes yes     18  0

 It seems that this font is not a font of the suite.

 Let me stess it in other words: this (Font ... not found) is not the
 topic of thread. It is completely inrelated (IMHO) with vf font
 problem (vf font leads to that checksum message). I took that font
 because it has corresponding vf file.
ok it was just to have as much data as possible.

 We have

 $vftovp txr.vf
 (VTITLE )
 (FAMILY TXR)
 (FACE F MRR)
 (CODINGSCHEME TEX TEXT)
 (DESIGNSIZE R 10.0)
 (COMMENT DESIGNSIZE IS IN POINTS)
 (COMMENT OTHER SIZES ARE MULTIPLES OF DESIGNSIZE)
 (CHECKSUM O 32212676346)

 while from  luatex source

 source/texk/web2c/luatexdir/font/vfovf.w:
 @ process a local font in \.{VF} file
 @c
 static internal_font_number
 vf_def_font(internal_font_number f, unsigned char *vf_buffer, int *vf_cr)
 {
 :
 unsigned long checksum;
 cs.b0 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr)];
 cs.b1 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 1];
 cs.b2 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 2];
 cs.b3 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 3];
 (*vf_cr) += 4;
 checksum = (unsigned)
 (cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3);
 :

 if (checksum != 0  font_checksum(k) != 0
  checksum != font_checksum(k))
 vf_local_font_warning(f, k, checksum mismatch, (int) checksum,
   (int) font_checksum(k));
 if (ds != font_dsize(k))
 vf_local_font_warning(f, k, design size mismatch, ds,
   font_dsize(k));

 It's not related to MKIV but to luatex, and it's a warning.
 It doesn't even matter to have --modules==all, this vf file  in the
 standard standalone.
 Of course you must have the pfb/afm or otf or ttf file, as usual,
 otherwise the pdf is wrong

I was not sure, that why I began this thread. I started with latex example,
then strip it down to plain tex one and after that came to context
minimal example.

AFAIU, context suite doesn't have plain pdftex and luatex formats,
therefore I compile minimal plain tex example with TeX Live 2011, and
luatex doesn't print such message though it reads vf file.

The problem indeed may be it luatex and how it works with vf fonts, but
as I said, I'm not sure (don't know very well either plain tex or context).

P.S. Unrelated: seems I completely lost, I read web sources, the
quoted extract from luatex source and I don't understand how this
number '32212676346' can be presented as

cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3

If I don't lose my math skills the '32212676346' is
32212676346=7·256^{4}+128·256^{3}+6·256^{2}+110·256^{1}+250·256^{0}

---
WBR, Vladimir Lomov

-- 
If only God would give me some clear sign!  Like making a large deposit
in my name at a Swiss bank.
-- Woody Allen, Without Feathers
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:
 We have

 $vftovp txr.vf
 (VTITLE )
 (FAMILY TXR)
 (FACE F MRR)
 (CODINGSCHEME TEX TEXT)
 (DESIGNSIZE R 10.0)
 (COMMENT DESIGNSIZE IS IN POINTS)
 (COMMENT OTHER SIZES ARE MULTIPLES OF DESIGNSIZE)
 (CHECKSUM O 32212676346)

 while from  luatex source

 source/texk/web2c/luatexdir/font/vfovf.w:
 @ process a local font in \.{VF} file
 @c
 static internal_font_number
 vf_def_font(internal_font_number f, unsigned char *vf_buffer, int *vf_cr)
 {
 :
 unsigned long checksum;
     cs.b0 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr)];
     cs.b1 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 1];
     cs.b2 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 2];
     cs.b3 = vf_buffer[(*vf_cr) + 3];
     (*vf_cr) += 4;
     checksum = (unsigned)
         (cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3);
 :

 if (checksum != 0  font_checksum(k) != 0
              checksum != font_checksum(k))
             vf_local_font_warning(f, k, checksum mismatch, (int) checksum,
                                   (int) font_checksum(k));
         if (ds != font_dsize(k))
             vf_local_font_warning(f, k, design size mismatch, ds,
                                   font_dsize(k));

 It's not related to MKIV but to luatex, and it's a warning.
 It doesn't even matter to have --modules==all, this vf file  in the
 standard standalone.
 Of course you must have the pfb/afm or otf or ttf file, as usual,
 otherwise the pdf is wrong

 I was not sure, that why I began this thread. I started with latex example,
 then strip it down to plain tex one and after that came to context
 minimal example.
it's also in pdftex: see
function vf_def_font
in
src/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftex.web


 AFAIU, context suite doesn't have plain pdftex and luatex formats,
 therefore I compile minimal plain tex example with TeX Live 2011, and
 luatex doesn't print such message though it reads vf file.
Hm, have a look at
tex/texmf-context/tex/generic/context/luatex


 The problem indeed may be it luatex and how it works with vf fonts, but
 as I said, I'm not sure (don't know very well either plain tex or context).

 P.S. Unrelated: seems I completely lost, I read web sources, the
 quoted extract from luatex source and I don't understand how this
 number '32212676346' can be presented as

 cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3

 If I don't lose my math skills the '32212676346' is
 32212676346=7·256^{4}+128·256^{3}+6·256^{2}+110·256^{1}+250·256^{0}
IIRC, 32212676346 should be the checksum stored inside the file, ie
the font_checksum.


-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___

Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Ulrike Fischer
Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:

 It's not related to MKIV but to luatex.

I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader).

It is a bit difficult to demonstrate it with context (how to you use
luatex without mkiv there?) but latex (or plain) it is quite easy:

The followings examples load pplr7t.vf.  Both give the checksum
mismatch message in the log if and only if the lua-fontloader
luaotfload it also loaded:

%LaTeX
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{luaotfload}
\begin{document}
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\end{document}

%plain
\input luaotfload.sty
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\bye

So the code from luaotfload (which is based on the context
fontloader code) changes a checksum (either in the vf or in the
tfm-information) and so the check in the luatex engines fails.

(Imho it is only a minor problem, vf-fonts are not much used with
luatex).  


-- 
Ulrike Fischer 

___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Hans Hagen

On 1-2-2012 15:15, Ulrike Fischer wrote:

Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:


It's not related to MKIV but to luatex.


I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader).

It is a bit difficult to demonstrate it with context (how to you use
luatex without mkiv there?) but latex (or plain) it is quite easy:

The followings examples load pplr7t.vf.  Both give the checksum
mismatch message in the log if and only if the lua-fontloader
luaotfload it also loaded:

%LaTeX
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{luaotfload}
\begin{document}
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\end{document}

%plain
\input luaotfload.sty
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\bye

So the code from luaotfload (which is based on the context
fontloader code) changes a checksum (either in the vf or in the
tfm-information) and so the check in the luatex engines fails.

(Imho it is only a minor problem, vf-fonts are not much used with
luatex).


Afaik nothing is done with a checksum. There is a checksum field in the 
loaded tfm but I don't think one has to be passed to luatex. Maybe one 
should be passed when a regular tfm file is used but even then, loading 
a vf file is independent.


So, it's best to just ignore that message.

Hans

-
  Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
  Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
 | www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Ulrike Fischer ne...@nililand.de wrote:
 Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:

 It's not related to MKIV but to luatex.

 I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader).
The message can be reproduced also with luatex --fmt=luatex-plain.fmt
The font structure has a key checksum, but luatex doesn't use e by
default is zero
from vf from tfm used value type
checksum yes yes  nonumber default: 0
So maybe font_checksum is zero, and checksum is 32212676346
(i.e. the opposite that I wrote).
-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Khaled Hosny
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 03:15:14PM +0100, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
 So the code from luaotfload (which is based on the context
 fontloader code) changes a checksum (either in the vf or in the
 tfm-information) and so the check in the luatex engines fails.

I tried printing the tfm table we pass to the backed, and the checksum
matches the one in the VF file, so this is a bit confusing and may be,
for some reason, luatex is comparing the checksums for different fonts,
but since this does not happen without the font loader it is likely to
be the culprit.

Regards,
 Khaled
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Khaled Hosny
On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 03:47:32PM +0100, luigi scarso wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Ulrike Fischer ne...@nililand.de wrote:
  Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:
 
  It's not related to MKIV but to luatex.
 
  I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader).
 The message can be reproduced also with luatex --fmt=luatex-plain.fmt
 The font structure has a key checksum, but luatex doesn't use e by
 default is zero
 from vf from tfm used value type
 checksum yes yes  nonumber default: 0
 So maybe font_checksum is zero, and checksum is 32212676346
 (i.e. the opposite that I wrote).

So now that is a question to Taco, if checksum is not used by luatex,
why id there a difference when the font is loaded in the old way (i.e.
no callbacks involved) and when it is loaded define_font callback?

Regards,
 Khaled
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Vladimir Lomov
Hello,
** Hans Hagen [2012-02-01 15:22:58 +0100]:

 On 1-2-2012 15:15, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
 Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:

It's not related to MKIV but to luatex.

I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader).

It is a bit difficult to demonstrate it with context (how to you use
luatex without mkiv there?) but latex (or plain) it is quite easy:

The followings examples load pplr7t.vf.  Both give the checksum
mismatch message in the log if and only if the lua-fontloader
luaotfload it also loaded:

%LaTeX
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{luaotfload}
\begin{document}
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\end{document}

%plain
\input luaotfload.sty
\font\test=pplr7t \test abc
\bye

So the code from luaotfload (which is based on the context
fontloader code) changes a checksum (either in the vf or in the
tfm-information) and so the check in the luatex engines fails.

(Imho it is only a minor problem, vf-fonts are not much used with
luatex).

 Afaik nothing is done with a checksum. There is a checksum field in
 the loaded tfm but I don't think one has to be passed to luatex.
 Maybe one should be passed when a regular tfm file is used but even
 then, loading a vf file is independent.

 So, it's best to just ignore that message.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this how I understand TFM font and currect
state of tex engines (actually pdftex, xetex and luatex):
1. to use any font in tex one need a TFM file (file name = fontname.TFM),
that file actually contain informationabout font, not how exatly glyphs
are constructed;
2. when [original] tex read a document file it searches for TFM and VF
files, read them and write DVI file with information about that files;
3. after that user can send file to printer or publisher to print it on
printer. As I understand the purpose of checksum was to be sure that
publisher or printer would use exatly the same fonts as user. If user
converts DVI file to PS/PDF one on his/she computer using dvips or
dvipdfm* the checksum mostly useless, assuming files are not corrupted.

Nowadays pdftex, xetex and luatex are widely used and most time users
generate PDF files on the same computer they write documents, send PDF
files which have they own mechanism to check font consistency.

But still there are [plenty] DVI files around, as well as luatex engine
might generate DVI file. The convertion to PS/PDF is performed by
dvips/dvipdfm* programs, that's ok. But what about luatex with DVI
output?

My conclusion:
1. if PDF output is only interesting then it is Ok, ignore that message,
because font information is already in PDF and PDF programs should deal
with it;
2. if DVI output is concerned then luatex _must_ be consistent with
pdftex (also can write DVI files), which, imho (don't check), takes care
about both TFM and VF checksums.

---
WBR, Vladimir Lomov

-- 
The happiest time of a person's life is after his first divorce.
-- J.K. Galbraith 
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread Vladimir Lomov
Hello,
** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 15:04:07 +0100]:
[...]

 I was not sure, that why I began this thread. I started with latex example,
 then strip it down to plain tex one and after that came to context
 minimal example.
 it's also in pdftex: see
 function vf_def_font
 in
 src/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftex.web

Will look in it.

 AFAIU, context suite doesn't have plain pdftex and luatex formats,
 therefore I compile minimal plain tex example with TeX Live 2011, and
 luatex doesn't print such message though it reads vf file.
 Hm, have a look at
 tex/texmf-context/tex/generic/context/luatex

In my installation this directory doesn't have fmt files. In any case I
will look in it.

 The problem indeed may be it luatex and how it works with vf fonts, but
 as I said, I'm not sure (don't know very well either plain tex or context).

 P.S. Unrelated: seems I completely lost, I read web sources, the
 quoted extract from luatex source and I don't understand how this
 number '32212676346' can be presented as

 cs.b0 * 256 * 256 * 256 + cs.b1 * 256 * 256 + cs.b2 * 256 + cs.b3

 If I don't lose my math skills the '32212676346' is
 32212676346=7·256^{4}+128·256^{3}+6·256^{2}+110·256^{1}+250·256^{0}
 IIRC, 32212676346 should be the checksum stored inside the file, ie
 the font_checksum.

Yes, that's right, but I forgot that this is octal number, therefore
032212676346=3526065382=210·256^{3}+43·256^{2}+124·256^{1}+230·256^{0},
so 210,43,124,230 are written in file as D2, 2B, 7C, E6 (which I found
in VF file :).

---
WBR, Vladimir Lomov

-- 
The molars, I'm sure, will be all right, the molars can take care of
themselves, the old man said, no longer to me.  But what will become 
of the bicuspids?
-- The Old Man and his Bridge
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-02-01 Thread luigi scarso
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello,
 ** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 15:04:07 +0100]:
 [...]

 I was not sure, that why I began this thread. I started with latex example,
 then strip it down to plain tex one and after that came to context
 minimal example.
 it's also in pdftex: see
 function vf_def_font
 in
 src/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftex.web

 Will look in it.

 AFAIU, context suite doesn't have plain pdftex and luatex formats,
 therefore I compile minimal plain tex example with TeX Live 2011, and
 luatex doesn't print such message though it reads vf file.
 Hm, have a look at
 tex/texmf-context/tex/generic/context/luatex

 In my installation this directory doesn't have fmt files. In any case I
 will look in it.
yes, but you can generate it with
luatex --ini luatex-plain.tex


-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-01-31 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,
 please consider the following example:
 example file=ex8.tex
 \starttext

 \font\test=txr \test abs

 \stoptext
 /example

 I process this document with context (context --version - 2012.01.25)
 nothing suspecious in terminal output but in log file I see checksum
 mismatch,
 terminal
 $ grep 'checksum' ex8.log
 checksum mismatch in font txr.vf ignored
 /terminal

 Simple plain tex file
 example file=ex9.tex
 \font\test=txr \test abs
 \bye
 /example

 processed by luatex and pdftex engines (both from TeX Live 2011, I don't
 know
 how to generate formats for them in context suite) doesn't give same
 message.

 Is it a bug in font system of context?

 My standalone also says
LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
i.e I have not the font.
Maybe the tl2011 has this font ?


-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___

Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-01-31 Thread Vladimir Lomov
Hello,
** luigi scarso [2012-02-01 02:37:20 +0100]:

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,
 please consider the following example:
 example file=ex8.tex
 \starttext

 \font\test=txr \test abs

 \stoptext
 /example

 I process this document with context (context --version - 2012.01.25)
 nothing suspecious in terminal output but in log file I see checksum
 mismatch,
 terminal
 $ grep 'checksum' ex8.log
 checksum mismatch in font txr.vf ignored
 /terminal

 Simple plain tex file
 example file=ex9.tex
 \font\test=txr \test abs
 \bye
 /example

 processed by luatex and pdftex engines (both from TeX Live 2011, I don't
 know
 how to generate formats for them in context suite) doesn't give same
 message.

 Is it a bug in font system of context?

 My standalone also says
 LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
 i.e I have not the font.
 Maybe the tl2011 has this font ?

I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh --modules=all'.

Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
pdf file).

---
WBR, Vladimir Lomov

-- 
Never eat anything bigger than your head.
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Dubious checksum mismatch message on log file

2012-01-31 Thread luigi scarso
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Vladimir Lomov lomov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I specially chose that font (txr, txr.tfm and txr.vf files), it is
 distributed by txfonts package. May be you installation doesn't have
 them because I installed context suite with './first-setup.sh --modules=all'.

 Nevertheless, that 'Font ... at 600 ...' reminds me how pdftex (pdflatex
 actually) deals with tfm/mf/pk fonts (generate pk and insert them into
 pdf file).
Even with --modules=all'
LuaTeX warning (file rtxptmr): Font rtxptmr at 600 not found
and
$ pdffonts test.pdf

name type  emb sub uni object ID
 - --- --- --- -
Error: font resource is not a dictionary
JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular CID Type 0C   yes yes yes 18  0

It seems that this font is not a font of the suite.

-- 
luigi
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___