https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47711
Summary: [PATCH] Wrong CIDSet when embedding CID font subset in
a PDF.
Product: Fop
Version: all
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows XP
Status: NEW
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47711
Nicolas PENINGUY n...@lostgeeks.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24153|application/octet-stream|text/plain
Hi Laurent,
The index page is indeed the very last page, but since I still have the fo
file, I can add further indizes and cover pages later. I just don't have them
at the moment and I don't need them for the correct page numbers of the index,
so I can look for the last page. You might as
There we go again. ;-) I can understand the wishes and cravings of the
developers (feeling them myself), but as I've said before: such a
decision should be made with the user community in the back, i.e. there
should be another user survey to gather current data. Just because Sun
EOLs a Java
by user content
and fop requires ids to be unique anyway.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Georg Datterl
__ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des
signatures de virus 4350 (20090820) __
Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http
On 20/08/2009, at 7:41 PM, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
There we go again. ;-) I can understand the wishes and cravings of the
developers (feeling them myself), but as I've said before: such a
decision should be made with the user community in the back, i.e.
there
should be another user survey to
to be unique anyway.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Georg Datterl
__ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la base des
signatures de virus 4350 (20090820) __
Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
Hi Simon,
Simon Pepping wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:44:03AM +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Uhm, Simon, this change uses tons of Java 1.5 features. The build fails
now on Java 1.4. OK if we revert until you've had a chance to revisit?
I am surprised. My eclipse project is set to 1.4
Hi All,
Having had no feedback from the users list, I’m happy to announce that
the ChangingIPDHack branch is now totally bug-free :-)
Following the discussion on general@ [1], the best way to handle this
probably is to merge the changes back into the Trunk, even if they are
hacky. Maintaining a
On 20.08.2009 13:42:48 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Hi All,
Having had no feedback from the users list, I’m happy to announce that
the ChangingIPDHack branch is now totally bug-free :-)
You ready to bet money on that? ;-)
Following the discussion on general@ [1], the best way to handle this
Sorry Vincent but I have no time to test your work at the moment. Hacks
are rarely satisifying, but it seems that you have made the best of a
constraining situation, +1 from me.
Adrian.
Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Hi All,
Having had no feedback from the users list, I’m happy to announce that
Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Hi All,
Thanks for starting the vote Vincent.
Having had no feedback from the users list, I’m happy to announce that
the ChangingIPDHack branch is now totally bug-free :-)
Following the discussion on general@ [1], the best way to handle this
probably is to merge
Thanks for the retroweaver report.
I believe I removed all methods which are not Java 1.4 compliant.
I tried to do a compilation in Java 1.4, but I failed with an
UnsupportedClassVersionError, which I am not going to investigate
now. So I could not test this myself.
Simon
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 02:14:39PM +0100, Chris Bowditch wrote:
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
There we go again. ;-) I can understand the wishes and cravings of the
developers (feeling them myself), but as I've said before: such a
decision should be made with the user community in the back, i.e.
On 20 Aug 2009, at 12:10, Georg Datterl wrote:
Hi Georg, Laurent,
Yesterday evening I had a look at the FOP code with your other
proposal about Knuth Sequence in mind. Well, that's too hard
for me yet and I'll take the easy (hum) way for the moment.
I don't understand the theory behind it
On 20 Aug 2009, at 13:42, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
snip /
So I’d like to launch a vote for merging the following branch:
https://svn.eu.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/Temp_ChangingIPDHack
into Trunk.
Like Adrian, I haven't been able to allocate the time to run tests of
my own,
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47710
--- Comment #3 from Andreas L. Delmelle adelme...@apache.org 2009-08-20
14:19:21 PDT ---
Quick fix committed in r806361.
I'm inclined to leave this bug open for the moment, as this is not really the
cleanest way to solve it. The real
Another 'No time to test it!' +1 from me...
Clay
On 8/20/09, Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Having had no feedback from the users list, I’m happy to announce that
the ChangingIPDHack branch is now totally bug-free :-)
Following the discussion on general@ [1], the
18 matches
Mail list logo
