On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
And what about trying a trivial plain script:
\nopagenumbers
\font\A=lmsy5 \font\a=ec-lmr5
\font\B=lmsy6 \font\b=ec-lmr6
\font\C=lmsy7 \font\c=ec-lmr7
\font\D=lmsy8 \font\d=ec-lmr8
\font\E=lmsy9 \font\e=ec-lmr9
\font\F=lmsy10
Norbert Preining wrote:
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
And what about trying a trivial plain script:
\nopagenumbers
\font\A=lmsy5 \font\a=ec-lmr5
\font\B=lmsy6 \font\b=ec-lmr6
\font\C=lmsy7 \font\c=ec-lmr7
\font\D=lmsy8 \font\d=ec-lmr8
\font\E=lmsy9
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
There are no fonts in question from which the incriminated (tall and thin)
section glyphs may originate. Which program could intervene on the way?
Mark mentioned it several times, it seems to be the freetype renderer.
xpdf per default uses t1lib
NP Mark mentioned it several times, it seems to be the freetype renderer.
NP xpdf per default uses t1lib and with t1lib rasterizer it does work
NP without problems.
Sorry, I'm not on the list dev-context@ntg.nl, I received only the letter
from you and (one) from Mike Bird [EMAIL PROTECTED], who
On Sam, 10 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
Thank you very much -- this is perhaps the best bug report
i've ever got. :-) It seems, however, that -- as Taco suggested:
Thanks, I know how bad are bad bug reports, as DD of texlive I have to
fight with enough bad ones ;-)
This looks
Hi Norbert!
Thank you very much -- this is perhaps the best bug report
i've ever got. :-) It seems, however, that -- as Taco suggested:
This looks suspiciously like a bug (aka optimization) in kpdf.
The glyphs (in lmsy5, lmsy6, lmsy7, lmsy8, lmsy9, and lmsy10) are built
properly, the relevant
Hi,
Concerning the lm rendering problems ... Jacko would like to have a
report on this so that they can take it into account. Similar problems
could occur with the tex-gyre fonts.
Hans
--
-
Hi Boguslaw!
Here a short report: The following file:
\starttext
\S1
\blank[big]
\S2\crlf\S3
\stoptext
compiled with current context uses the lmmath fonts:
$ pdffonts test.pdf
name type emb sub uni object ID
Hi Jacko!
On Mit, 07 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
I'd be glad if I could have also the screen shots, unless preparing them
is too cumbersome and time-consuming for you.
Here are 4 images:
xpdf-kpdf-100.png
xpdf-kpdf-125.png
xpdf-kpdf-150.png
Norbert Preining wrote:
Hi Jacko!
On Mit, 07 Feb 2007, Boguslaw Jackowski wrote:
I'd be glad if I could have also the screen shots, unless preparing them
is too cumbersome and time-consuming for you.
Here are 4 images:
xpdf-kpdf-100.png
xpdf-kpdf-125.png
On Wednesday 07 February 2007 10:27, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Did anybody send a bug report to the kpdf maintainers yet? This looks
suspiciously like a bug (aka optimization) in kpdf.
xpdf -t1lib no test.pdf gives the same display errors as kpdf, so
kpdf is ruled out.
I'm out of my depth here but
Hi,
Here a short report: The following file:
Thank you for the concise note.
I'd be glad if I could have also the screen shots, unless preparing them
is too cumbersome and time-consuming for you.
Cheers -- Jacko
--
BOP s. c.
ul. Bora-Komorowskiego 24, 80-377 Gdansk, Poland
tel. (+48 58)
12 matches
Mail list logo
