Hello,

I have been having a bit of a trouble with the way xdvik (and also the
plain ol' xdvi) display some files.  Most notably in gastex pictures
some elements do not get drawn by xdvi*.  An example is shown at
<http://turing.ubishops.ca/misc/xdvi-gastex.png>, as follows:

1. The window to the right (having the focus) is from a Linux box and
   shows the page displayed correctly (save for some possible font
   problems that have no relevance to the discussion at hand).

2. The window to the left (without focus) is from the local (Fink's)
   version of the xdvi and shows the page displayed in an incomplete
   manner.  Indeed, note that most of the text in the pictures from
   Figure 1 is missing.  From various tests I inferred that Fink's
   xdvi draws the picture elements over opaque squares that hide
   whatever else is "underneath" whereas the Linux version does not.
   I am not sure that my inference is correct though.

This is not the only failure to draw figures.  If multiple figures
appear on multiple pages then parts of the old pictures appear on top
of the (incompletely drawn) subsequent figures.  An example can be
seen at <http://turing.ubishops.ca/misc/xdvi-gastex-1.png> (as above,
the left xdvi window is Fink's and the right xdvi window is a
reference from a Linux box).  It should be noted that if the document
is opened directly on Page 13 then the spurious drawings do not
appear, so these drawings are based on the history of the pages having
been displayed before rather than the structure of the document.

The DVI file itself is intact (and was copied over rather than being
typeset locally on each box).  It prints fine and can be converted to
PDF or Postscript just fine as well.

As I said earlier this phenomenon manifests itself in xdvik (part of
texlive) and also in the standalone xdvi.

In case it matters, here is the (gastex) code that generated Figure
1(b) as a complete, typesettable document (note however that this all
happens with most (all?) gastex pictures):

------ test.tex begins ------
\documentclass[10pt]{article}
% ...
\usepackage{gastex}
% ...
\compatiblegastexun
% ...
\begin{document}
% ...
    \begin{picture}(45,26)(-10,-4)
        %\put(-10,-4){\framebox(45,26){}}
        \gasset{Nadjust=wh,Nadjustdist=1,Nfill=n}

        \node(p1)(5,18){$p,\{a\}$}
        \node(q2)(10,9){$q,\{d\}$} 
        \node(q1)(0,9){$q,\{c\}$}
        \node(s)(10,0){$s,\emptyset$} 
        \node(r)(0,0){$r,\emptyset$}
        \node(p2)(25,18){$p,\{b\}$}
        \node(t)(25,9){$t,\{e\}$}
        \node(u)(25,0){$u,\emptyset$}

        \drawtrans(p1,q1){}
        \drawtrans(p1,q2){} 
        \drawtrans(q1,r){} 
        \drawtrans(q2,s){}
        \drawtrans(p2,t){}
        \drawtrans(t,u){}
        \drawloop[l](r){}
        \drawloop[r](s){}
        \drawloop[r](u){}
      \end{picture}
% ...
\end{document}
------ test.tex ends ------

I am almost sure that this is not the fault of xdvi per se but the
culprit is an underlying library (given that all versions of xdvi have
the problem).  I am not able to come up with any other "bright" idea.

I am copying the maintainers of xdvi and texlive in the hope that they
have a better understanding on what is going on.

Advice on how to diagnose this any further (or even on how to fix this
;-) ) is much appreciated.

I am running 0.36.4.1 with the distribution selfupdate-rsync Wed May
28 14:14:12 2014, 10.9, x86_64.

Best regards,
Stefan

-- 
If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it 
isn't, it ain't.  That's logic.  --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass

No HTML emails and proprietary attachments please <http://bruda.ca/ascii>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time is money. Stop wasting it! Get your web API in 5 minutes.
www.restlet.com/download
http://p.sf.net/sfu/restlet
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
[email protected]
List archive:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.macosx.fink.user
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users

Reply via email to