Re: [groff] PDF problems - see attached file

[P. Alejandro Lopez-Valencia]

At 11:03 a.m. 22/05/2002 -0400, Stewart Russell wrote:
> P. Alejandro Lopez-Valencia wrote:
> >
> > I'd suggest you file a report at SourceForge's GS bug tracker.
>                                                  ^^
> mind you, it could be an aspect of grops output. Feeding sample text 
> through Solaris 8 troff/dpost, the ps2pdf (7.04) output looks fine in 
> acroread. groff 1.17.2's output does not, and seems to trigger some class 
> of subsetting weirdness in gs7.

As far as I know grops postscript dictionary hasn't changed between 1.7.2 
and the latest development version. And the fact that gs 6.5.2 can produce 
good output is what I use to draw my conclusions. As well, and I forgot to 
mention it this morning, I did not use ps2pdf but rather Gsview 4.2 
internal hooks to the GS 7 API to produce the PDF.

It could be anything related to the interpreter, thus the real test would 
be trying to print the file to a true Adobe Postscript printer. grops' 
dictionary is level 1 but to make the test valid against GS 7.x, the 
printer should have a true Adobe Level 3 Postscript interpreter.

Another test to make sure that groff's ps output is correct, would be to 
run the postscript file through PSAlter, if anyone has it.

On the subsetting weirdness, it might be rather that GS 7.x has trouble 
with font custom vector re-encoding. There's definitely at least one 
serious bug in GS related to font embedding, i.e., it insists on including 
Times Roman even if not used in the original PS file. Or are you per chance 
using font outlines generated with any version of Fontographer?