Hi Deri,
> Is the download file expected to be immutable?
If it's shipped inside the package then yes, so that debsums(1) can test
it hasn't been changed. Ditto with other packaging formats AIUI.
> How do packagers deal with configuration files which are intended to
> be editable by users?
A
> Is the download file expected to be immutable? There are
> instructions how to add fonts to groff, which involves
> changing the download file. How do packagers deal with
> configuration files which are intended to be editable by
> users?
I recommend having your personal groff font folder
On Sunday, 1 March 2020 17:40:59 GMT Colin Watson wrote:
> Thanks, but this is unlikely to be a very helpful approach for files
> built as part of distribution-managed packages, where the shipped files
> are normally expected to be immutable (for example, checksumming the
> installed files would
Hello,
> > > you fixed this by seding the download file which doesn't exist in the
> > > debian distro.
>
> Not so:
>
> $ dpkg -L groff | grep download
> /usr/share/groff/1.22.4/font/devpdf/download
oops… sorry i missed it and thanks for letting me know.
> process. I hadn't noticed that
Hi Deri,
> The "*" just means that the font does not need to be included in the pdf,
> unless the -e flag was given to gropdf, i.e. it is one of the base fonts.
Thanks. That's not in the gropdf(1) I have here. It does say `filename
is searched for using the same mechanism that is used for
On Sunday, 1 March 2020 18:13:00 GMT Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Why do some of the filenames in my gropdf's download file start with
> ‘*/usr/share’ rather than the star-less version?
The "*" just means that the font does not need to be included in the pdf,
unless the -e flag was given to gropdf,
Hi Tadziu,
> Aren't the ghostscript fonts in /usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/ or
> /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript/ (depending on the distribution)
> independent of the ghostscript version?
Here, on Arch Linux, I have
/usr/share/fonts/gsfonts/URWGothic-Book.otf
> It would be preferable to make the download file independent
> of the ghostscript version, if possible.
Aren't the ghostscript fonts in /usr/share/fonts/type1/gsfonts/
or /usr/share/fonts/ghostscript/ (depending on the distribution)
independent of the ghostscript version?
On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 12:27:47PM +, Deri wrote:
> The download file is created by the program BuildFoundries which used to be
> left in the font/devpdf/util directory after install, no longer. Perhaps this
> ought to be installed in the bin directory during install. If the ghostscript
>
Hi Colin,
> > > /usr/share/ghostscript/9.27/Resource/Font/StandardSymbolsPS
...
> Apparently the current ghostscript version at build time gets built
> into /usr/share/groff/1.22.4/font/devpdf/download by way of groff's
> build process.
...
> For ongoing purposes, we may want to look at
On Sunday, 1 March 2020 09:36:53 GMT Colin Watson wrote:
> > > * troff should use the current version of ghostscript
> >
> > I'd guess so.
> >
> > Debian's groff maintainer, Colin Watson, is a subscriber here, and may
> > pipe up soon.
>
> Apparently the current ghostscript version at build
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 06:41:16PM +, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> > locate -bei StandardSymbolsPS
> > /usr/share/ghostscript/9.27/Resource/Font/StandardSymbolsPS
> >
> > you fixed this by seding the download file which doesn't exist in the
> > debian distro.
Not so:
$
Hi Marc,
> locate -bei StandardSymbolsPS
> /usr/share/ghostscript/9.27/Resource/Font/StandardSymbolsPS
>
> you fixed this by seding the download file which doesn't exist in the
> debian distro. i can't purge groff as it will uninstall a lot packages
> so what i did is
>
>
hello Werner and Deri,
> An alternative to that which compresses even better might be the
> `pdfsizeopt` script.
>
> https://github.com/pts/pdfsizeopt
actually the ps2pdf think works as a charm. the final makefile is
math.pdf : math.me
tbl $< |eqn -Tpdf| groff -Tpdf -k -P-e > math
hello,
> What distro and version is this, e.g. Ubuntu 18.04. Is groff from that
> distro, or something you've built?
by experience, sticking on debian stable is the best way to avoid
problems on linux so:
. /etc/os-release && echo $PRETTY_NAME
Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)
> After producing the file with -P-e and -Tpdf, if you wish to reduce
> the size of the pdf, use ps2pdf to process the pdf again, this will
> subset the fonts.
An alternative to that which compresses even better might be the
`pdfsizeopt` script.
https://github.com/pts/pdfsizeopt
Werner
Hi Piotr,
> Now the question, what if we compile with pdfroff ...? It does not
> support -e option and does not embed Symbol into PDF. Since pdfroff is
> devps-based and internally must be using the ps2pdf
It uses GhostScript's gs(1) to do ps2pdf(1)'s task, yes.
$ grep -nw gs
Hi Marc,
> fc-match -f '%{file}\n' Symbol
> /usr/share/fonts/truetype/openoffice/opens___.ttf
What distro and version is this, e.g. Ubuntu 18.04. Is groff from that
distro, or something you've built?
> locate symbol.ttf
> /usr/share/wine/fonts/symbol.ttf
Note, the Symbol
Ranph,
I confirm: in Ubuntu 18.04 and 16.04 the path to Symbol font in
/devpdf/download is wrong. The path fix indeed results in embedding all fonts
in case of compilation as
groff -Tpdf -P-e ...
Now the question, what if we compile with pdfroff ...?
It does not support -e option and does not
On Monday, 24 February 2020 14:21:26 GMT Marc Chantreux wrote:
> hello,
>
> > The symbol font is one of the base type 1 fonts which all pdf viewers
> > should support, so the font is not actually embedded in the pdf. You
> > could try adding "- P-e" to the groff command.
>
> Even if Tadziu told
Hi Piotr,
> A potential problem with GROFF/ghostscript is that it DOES NOT embed
> the Symbol font even with the -P-e option. I wish the developers could
> check this.
groff 1.22.4-1 on Arch Linux. I tried -e and found groff could no
longer find the Symbol font to embed. Investigation showed
People,
I have the same problem after having upgraded to Ubuntu 18.04. This is entirely
the viewer's issue: Evince, Zathura somehow lost the Symbol font, whereas Mupdf
and gv still show everything correctly. So my solution was to switch from the
standard Evince to Mupdf.
A potential problem
hello,
> The symbol font is one of the base type 1 fonts which all pdf viewers should
> support, so the font is not actually embedded in the pdf. You could try
> adding "-
> P-e" to the groff command.
Even if Tadziu told us this is the current recommendation (embed
everything), i really can't
> They both probably use a central font service. On this Arch Linux
> machine, I get
>
> $ fc-match -f '%{file}\n' Symbol
fc-match -f '%{file}\n' Symbol
/usr/share/fonts/truetype/openoffice/opens___.ttf
dpkg -S /usr/share/fonts/truetype/openoffice/opens___.ttf
fonts-opensymbol:
> > yet: i'm not sure about what to be fixed.
You can also install an old version of Acrobat reader.
acroread 3 (you can find the rpm online) comes with the
original base 13 fonts (plus Zapf Dingbats), and you can
make fontconfig (assuming that's what zathura and evince
use) find those as well,
Hi Marc,
> i tried both with zatura and evince
They both probably use a central font service. On this Arch Linux
machine, I get
$ fc-match -f '%{file}\n' Symbol
/usr/share/fonts/TTF/symbol.ttf
$ pacman -Qo /usr/share/fonts/TTF/symbol.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/TTF/symbol.ttf is owned
> i didn't know gv can render pdf files and it happens it's
> the only one to render math.pdf the file correctly.
gv uses ghostscript (gs) to render the pages, and ghostscript
provides its own fonts.
> pdffonts math.pdf
> shows that Symbol is not emb. i thought fonts were always
> embeded in
John and Deri,
> > What program are you using to preview the PDF?
evince, zathura ... and now gv thanks to Tadziu.
> The symbol font is one of the base type 1 fonts which all pdf viewers should
> support, so the font is not actually embedded in the pdf.
ok. so i have to fix my readers :)
hello Tadziu,
> What viewer are you using?
i tried both with zatura and evince
> Does the PDF render okay if you use gv to display it?
i didn't know gv can render pdf files and it happens it's the only one
to render math.pdf the file correctly.
pdffonts math.pdf
name type
On Friday, 21 February 2020 15:26:50 GMT John Gardner wrote:
> I can confirm the PDF you've produced is correctly-formed; so this narrows
> the problem down to a missing font (or misconfigured environment).
>
> What program are you using to preview the PDF?
Marc,
The symbol font is one of the
>
> symbol font is here as i read
[output clipped]
I can confirm the PDF you've produced is correctly-formed; so this narrows
the problem down to a missing font (or misconfigured environment).
What program are you using to preview the PDF?
On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 at 01:52, Marc Chantreux wrote:
hello John and thanks for helping,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 08:47:18PM +1100, John Gardner wrote:
> Even without seeing the PDF output, I'd say you have one or more fonts
> missing from your installation path. Do you have GhostScript installed?
$ aptitude search '~i ~n ghostscript' -F%p%v
> (I do notice the bar above the c ends before the bar
> over the a.)
That is probably because in most italic fonts the "a" is
slightly wider than the "c". If I use Courier-Oblique on
my system, the situation is reversed, because although both
characters have the same nominal width, the "c"
> eqn |groff ; ps2pdf14
>
> the ps rendering is fine but the pdf one got the same issue.
If the Postscript renders fine, your problem may be with the
PS to PDF conversion or with your PDF viewer. What viewer
are you using? Does the PDF render okay if you use gv
(or gsview on Windows) to
Hi Marc,
> I try to get a correct rendering for this simple eqn
>
> .EQ
> sqrt a over sqrt c
> .EN
With groff 1.22.4-1 and ghostscript 9.27-1 on Arch Linux, I ran
printf '%s\n' .EQ 'sqrt a over sqrt c' .EN |
groff -Tpdf -e >eq.pdf
printf '%s\n' .EQ 'sqrt a over sqrt c'
Hi Marc,
Even without seeing the PDF output, I'd say you have one or more fonts
missing from your installation path. Do you have GhostScript installed?
Also, you can debug formatted output by calling groff with its -Z switch.
You should see something like this:
$ eqn -Tpdf | groff -Tpdf -Z
x T
hello people,
I try to get a correct rendering for this simple eqn
.EQ
sqrt a over sqrt c
.EN
first i tried
eqn -Tpdf|groff -Tpdf
and noticed that the begin of the square root symbol is replaced by a
rectangle that goes down to the bottom of the symbol.
also i tried
eqn
37 matches
Mail list logo
