[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [cjk] texlive svn write access Fw: Re: revisiting ttf2tfm and dvipdf

From: Peter Breitenlohner
Subject: Re: [cjk] texlive svn write access Fw: Re: revisiting ttf2tfm and dvipdfmx
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:12:55 +0200 (CEST)
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23)

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Hin-Tak Leung wrote:

- the post table issue is in pdftex/dvipdfmx/xdvidpdfmx (see below). Very
  old fonts use 00000000 but really should be treated as 00030000 (which
  is basically no post table).

Hi Hin-Tak,

I'd rather say:
      ...................... but really should have 00030000 (no post table).

I really don't see a reason to keep broken font files.

dvipdfmx/xdvidpdfmx do just that but produce a warning (as they should, such
fonts should be fixed).  Not so sure about pdftex/luatex/xetex, still have
to look what they do (if anything).

All of them do an abort.

Does 'all' mean pdftex/luatex/xetex or as well dvipdfmx/xdvidpdfmx?

Does the abort give an error message stating the reason?

Not everybody should be required to use a hex editor to modify a "not-needed" byte in some 15-yr-old fonts to use them.

I don't agree at all.  Everybody should either throw away these broken font
files or get them fixed (with a hex editor or otherwise).


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]