On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > A Divendres, 22 de gener de 2010, David A Benjamin va escriure: >> Oops. Sorry guys; forgot to set the subject. > > I've applied the changes and ran my test suite, found the following: > > It fixes http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26248
Fancy. > It changes the rendering of http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6688 > but can't tell if better or worse, we render different than Adobe Reader > > It changes rendering of pages 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17, 25, 29 of > http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10898 but can't tell if better or > worse, we render different than Adobe Reader (starting index at 1) Mmm. I'll go look at those this evening and see what (else?) is wrong with them. > It changes rendering of pages 3, 4, 5, 14, 14 of > http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24575 i'd say it looks better but > still different than Adobe Reader (starting index at 1) Hrm. Where is it different? It was my main test case when working on these; I thought I got it to match. I see several missing columns, but they are similarly missing on acroread (Adobe Reader 9.2). That PDF apparently has pretty ridiculous issues; if you run podofouncompress on it, you get zlib errors, but both acroread and poppler manage to make some sense of the stream and, at least as far as I can tell, look the same now, but apparently not? (Poppler strangely doesn't complain about zlib. I'm guessing it doesn't check for errors in some location and should.) David _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
