> I found that there would always be a warning "pdfTeX warning (dest):
> name{} has been referenced but does not exist, replaced by a fixed
> one" with pdftex. I tracked it down to these changes.
>
> The use of \countB appears to conflict with the use of \countB in
> \pdfgettoks. I didn't fully
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 1:36 PM Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> It turned out that character protrusion (for *all* TeX engines) was
> neither activated nor working at all. Here is a series of patches to
> fix that.
I found that there would always be a warning "pdfTeX warning (dest): name{} has
been
Hi
> I don't know. Norbert, is lm a recommends in Debian? That might be
Yes,
texlive-base recommends lmodern
and thus it should be automatically installed
> of minimalism, I would suggest just sticking with the default fonts,
> meaning [T1] and EC/cm-super.
As said, I don't think that
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 09:08:19PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:23:11AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > - make cm-super a dependency of texinfo (next version, in Debian)
> > that way the package will be pulled in in any case
> >
> > I am fine with doing both.
>
>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 03:34:08PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> Norbert suggested that they could make cm-super (or lmodern) a depends
> or recommends on texinfo, if you wish. Please advise :).
I hope it was clear from my other mail that I don't think this is a good
idea.
> This could be done
gavin> Is it the same story with lmodern which is another frequently
recommended font package?
I don't know. Norbert, is lm a recommends in Debian? That might be
enough reason to \usepackage{lmodern} by default. If not, for the sake
of minimalism, I would suggest just sticking with the
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 04:43:04PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> Patrice, Gavin - I've been talking with my friend Norbert Preining, who
> used to be the Debian maintainer of the texlive packages. (He's also one
> of the principal maintainers, with me and a couple others, of upstream
> TeX Live.)
>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:23:11AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > He's willing in principle to suggest that cm-super[-minimal] become part
> > of the recommended TeX packages, but I'm not sure that is warranted.
>
> I just suggested two possible options, both I don't mind:
> - make cm-super
Hi Werner
On Fri, 30 Sep 2022, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > - make cm-super a dependency of texinfo (next version, in Debian)
> > that way the package will be pulled in in any case
>
> IMHO that's the way to go.
I agree that for texinfo this is the proper solution.
Still, thinking that using T1
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 04:43:04PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
>
> If you want any action to be taken, let me know. --thanks, karl.
I sent a mail to tldistro to get information on cm-super being installed
or not in other distros. Hopefully, this should help us know to what
extent having cm-super
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 08:23:11AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> - make cm-super (the full set) a "recommends" of
> texlive-fonts-recommended
> This will install it automatically unless the user explicitly disables
> installation of recommended packages.
I can't say for
> - make cm-super a dependency of texinfo (next version, in Debian)
> that way the package will be pulled in in any case
IMHO that's the way to go.
Werner
Hi all,
> Patrice, Gavin - I've been talking with my friend Norbert Preining, who
> used to be the Debian maintainer of the texlive packages. (He's also one
And also of the texinfo package ;-) And on the list!
> He's willing in principle to suggest that cm-super[-minimal] become part
> of the
Patrice, Gavin - I've been talking with my friend Norbert Preining, who
used to be the Debian maintainer of the texlive packages. (He's also one
of the principal maintainers, with me and a couple others, of upstream
TeX Live.)
He confirms that cm-super is not installed as part of the
pdfTeX error (font expansion): auto expansion is only possible with
scalable fonts.
Indeed, font expansion is only usable with scalable fonts. I don't
believe it's possible to test at the TeX level whether a given font
(e.g., cmr10) will ultimately be rendered as outlines or bitmaps :(.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 05:01:18PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 06:41:44PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> > kb> Regarding typewriter: I reiterate the need to turn it off for display
> > kb> environments.
> >
> > On second thought, for the LaTeX backend, I can see how it would
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 06:41:44PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> kb> Regarding typewriter: I reiterate the need to turn it off for display
> kb> environments.
>
> On second thought, for the LaTeX backend, I can see how it would be
> better to simply take the default, that is,
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 08:20:17PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 09:38:30AM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> > ... but my feeling is
> > that this is the symptom of something wrong being done with fonts
> > selection in the LaTeX output, not an issue with microtype as such.
>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 04:22:44PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> There is a new converter in texi2any of Texinfo to LaTeX,
>
> I didn't know. Cool! People have long wanted this. Mainly so they can
> change fonts. So I hope you will support that -- which I think amounts
> to allowing the user to
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 04:22:45PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> If the output is better with microtype on, we should try to have it on.
>
> If Texinfo has microtype on by default, I agree the LaTeX backend should
> also have microtype on by default. That's fine.
>
> microtypee off if is
kb> Regarding typewriter: I reiterate the need to turn it off for display
kb> environments.
On second thought, for the LaTeX backend, I can see how it would be
better to simply take the default, that is, \usepackage{microtype}, and
let it be as it is. Going along with "make a natural LaTeX
If the output is better with microtype on, we should try to have it on.
If Texinfo has microtype on by default, I agree the LaTeX backend should
also have microtype on by default. That's fine.
microtypee off if is causes issues in LaTeX output,
Are you talking about the typewriter
There is a new converter in texi2any of Texinfo to LaTeX,
I didn't know. Cool! People have long wanted this. Mainly so they can
change fonts. So I hope you will support that -- which I think amounts
to allowing the user to add stuff to the preamble after your builtings.
On my debian
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 09:38:30AM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> ... but my feeling is
> that this is the symptom of something wrong being done with fonts
> selection in the LaTeX output, not an issue with microtype as such.
It is just a consequence of using T1 encoded fonts, which aren't used
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 06:59:10AM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> > As I said above, for the LaTeX output converted from Texinfo we use
> > quite a few packages to be able to output LaTeX that can express the
> > Texinfo formatting.
>
> It's not necessary to obey any of the formatting command for
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 01:32:36AM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> So, my question is how does Texinfo TeX select scalable fonts for the
> letters that exists in cm fonts, while LaTeX does not? Is there a way
> to have LaTeX select the same scalable fonts as TeX (even when cm-super
> is not
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 03:40:46PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> Hi Patrice - If you write to the tex-live list, more than likely I will
> end up being the one who answers, so we might as well continue here :).
>
> What is the question? I don't understand how or why we got on to LaTeX.
There is a
Hi Patrice - If you write to the tex-live list, more than likely I will
end up being the one who answers, so we might as well continue here :).
What is the question? I don't understand how or why we got on to LaTeX.
LaTeX cannot possibly enable microtype by default, if that's what you
were
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 05:21:55PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:09:21PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > I implemented in LaTeX output too. There was an error without the
> > cm-super font. I am a bit surprised that microtyping works out of the
> > box in TeX, but not
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 12:09:21PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> I implemented in LaTeX output too. There was an error without the
> cm-super font. I am a bit surprised that microtyping works out of the
> box in TeX, but not with LaTeX...
>
> I documented that cm-super is needed in the
>> Thus, I don't think it's worth the trouble to add support when it's
>> only protrusion. So I won't be working on this. Sorry.
>
> OK, I'll prepare a patch.
It turned out that character protrusion (for *all* TeX engines) was
neither activated nor working at all. Here is a series of patches to
On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 11:36:00AM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 03:18:07PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> > I am mainly unsure about if/how this should be turned on in Texinfo
> > files.
> >
> > Just make it an option, say, @microtype on|off. Off by default. (And
> >
> According to the table on page 6 in the current microtype
> package, XeTeX *does* support character protrusion!
>
> I said that in my first mail. XeTeX supports protrusion,
I missed that, sorry.
> but (unfortunately) not expansion. In my experience, protrusion has
> little effect;
Hi Gavin,
I've committed the code and set it on by default. It is controlled
by @microtype on|off.
Thanks!!
makes me suspect that special treatment of @example and @verbatim
may not be required,
I'm pretty sure it is.
as these environments are not filled and lines
Hi Werner,
According to the table on page 6 in the current microtype package,
XeTeX *does* support character protrusion!
I said that in my first mail. XeTeX supports protrusion, but
(unfortunately) not expansion. In my experience, protrusion has little
effect; expansion is where the
On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 11:36:02AM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> Still to do:
> * Documentation
> * Stub implementation in texi2any (doesn't need to do anything for
> any other output format).
Patrice has taken care of texi2any and I've added some documentation,
so all that is left now is XeTeX and
On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 03:18:07PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> I am mainly unsure about if/how this should be turned on in Texinfo
> files.
>
> Just make it an option, say, @microtype on|off. Off by default. (And
> forced to "off" when output is dvi.) That way it doesn't disturb
>
> This would lead to variant output between (dvi)-TeX, pdfTeX
> and possibly LuaTeX
>
> pdftex and luatex would normally have the same output. Any dvi engine,
> including xetex, would differ.
According to the table on page 6 in the current microtype package,
XeTeX *does* support
I am mainly unsure about if/how this should be turned on in Texinfo
files.
Just make it an option, say, @microtype on|off. Off by default. (And
forced to "off" when output is dvi.) That way it doesn't disturb
anyone. I would not advocate for it to be on by default.
This would
On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 02:28:08PM -0600, Karl Berry wrote:
> Hi Gavin. I've found that the microtype package for LaTeX
> (https://ctan.org/pkg/microtype) helps significantly in eliminating
> overfull lines without the need for rewriting text. (It also improves
> the esthetic appearance of the
40 matches
Mail list logo
