Re: [cjk] Installation Cyberbit as PostScript font failed

[Hin-Tak Leung]

Werner mostly already told you what you need to know already: most of the 
online docs are outdated. If you use current TeXLive, it should  just work 
without you messing with cybercjk/cyberbit; the arphic fonts 
(gkai/gbsn/bsmi/bkai) should be sufficient for your needs.

Yes, it is true that psfrag does not work nice with pdflatex - so you are stuck 
with plain latex/dvips/ps2pdf if you need psfrag. The reason is fairly simple 
and quite final: pdflatex does not involve ghostscript (or any postscript 
interpreter) and therefore any postscript tricks don't work, and never will.

If you are typesetting ancient chinese, most likely you should use the 
bsmi/bkai fonts (the traditional vairants), rather than gbsn/gkai . Besides 
Adobe SourceSan, WQY ( http://wenq.org/wqy2/index.cgi  ) are also quite 
extensive.

I tried 119 , 120, 124 from http://ctext.org/mozi/canon-ii . Yes, it is true it 
needs one glyph from subfont 38. As you see from 
http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=3893 , U+3893  is the 
old form of U+969C ( 
http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=969C ), so that's the 
only change I made  towards the end of line 4 of the group of 6. Attached is 
the example input tex file and output from latex then dvipdf , with bsmi. For 
most purposes, it probably is alright to make the switch this way from U+3893 
to U+969C .

Strangely enough , besides U+969C, many online versions of Mozi uses the 
somewhat unrelated U+5EAB ( 
http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetUnihanData.pl?codepoint=5EAB ) , such as 
http://phil.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/project/mobian/canon2/b19.htm , and some also uses 
the somewhat related U+7634 . I'd suggest just use U+969C unless you really 
want the antique variant.
 
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 30/5/17, amigolang <address@hidden> wrote:

 Dear Werner,
 first of all many thanks for your quick and
 comprehensive answer!
 In my email I tried to give as many hints as
 possible -- but I completely forgot to tell, that I am using
 texlive (and Winshell) since about the year 2000 or
 2002.
 I am happy, that you tell me, that generally I
 took the right approach. I tried gbsn first. That breaks as
 well telling me, that IT needs the font no. 38. But even
 more about one third of the rest of characters are simple
 missing (if I comment out the critical part -- the log file
 tells the same). 
 Gkai, bkai and bsmi I only tried with PDFLaTeX
  (in a small sample file), but it would not work,
 telling me, "Metric  (TFM) file not
 found."
 As the text I try to write  (or better copy)
 dates from the third century before Christ, it may very well
 be, that it contains rare characters. It is a part of the
 book of Mozi (numbers 119, 120 and 124 from
 http://ctwxt.org/mozi/canon-ii).
 I had a hard try already switching to either
 XeLaTeX or LuaLaTeX. For that I first tried to switch to
 PDFLaTeX, as from there the way wouldn't be long. The
 compilation first broke with several hundred
 errors. 
 Since I introduced the package etex into my
 files, that is substantially less. I still would have to
 alter several hundred places in my files, where I use
 psfrag. But I gave up after some time, when I realized, that
 the switch would not help substantially: 
 Whether I use pstool or auto-pst-pdf, the
 pictures with psfrag have to use the old LaTeX-way! So
 either I can not use the chinese fonts in pictures or I have
 to manage the PDF and the PostScript way, if I use one of
 the more modern ways... at least to me that looks more
 complicated than sticking to LaTeX...?
 So, when I now understand everything right, the
 only possible way seems to be to use the Noto fonts as you
 proposed. 
 I already once sprang back from that -- too
 difficult it seemed to me...
 Once more thanks for your
 help!Thorsten 
 
 
 Von meinem Samsung
 Gerät gesendet.

a.tex
Description: Text Data

a.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document