On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Carlos Konstanski wrote: > My ps2ascii man page mentions pstotext as an alternative. It claims that > pstotext is actually better because it takes the width of characters into > account:
> ps2ascii ignores the encoding and does not do especially well with > kerning. For that you should use pstotext for postscript (but presently > not for PDF). Carlos, pstotext is much older than ps2ascii: pstotext 1.9 of 2003-01-09 Copyright (C) 1995-1998, Digital Equipment Corporation. Modified by Ghostgum Software Pty Ltd. and the output is useless: ###### # ############ ###### # ## #### #### ##### ### ########## ########## ### #### ### # # # # ########## ###### # ############### ############# #### # #### ##### # ############ ### # ## ###### ##### #### ##### ######### ########## # ## # ##### ################# # ## ########## ############### # ############### #### Both pstotext and ps2ascii used to work flawlessly. I cannot recall when they stopped working, but it's a PITA that they have. Thanks, Rich -- Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D. | Integrity Credibility Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. | Innovation <http://www.appl-ecosys.com> Voice: 503-667-4517 Fax: 503-667-8863 _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
