[Groff] Re: Adding (math) fonts to groff

[Michail Vidiassov]

Dear Werner and Pedro Alejandro,

an attempt to create URW fonts descriptions for groff had problems with
Symbol-Slanted also
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html//groff/2002-04/msg00032.html

On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Werner LEMBERG wrote:

> > I guess that printafm program, now bundled with ghostscript, was
> > used to make symbosl.afm. It prints afm for a Type 1 font.
> > When I have run
> >   printafm Symbol-Slanted > symbolsl7.afm
> > the resulting file had only minor differences with symbolsl.afm from
> > groff.
>
> Can you provide a Makefile rule for that, together with a comment?

Makefile patch attached. I leave commenting to you, since I do not have
a clear idea of what coment you want.
afm for the most recent Adobe Symbol attached for reference.

One problem is that the generation of symbolsl.afm depends on
pfa/pfb file being available and on ghostscript being installed.

The other pne is that the use of Adobe fonts seems to be assumed.
Are the changes to make the font creation more easyly adjusted to
URW fonts desired?
Or for URW fonts a better solution is a separate Makefile?

If we go into business of creating packages for URW fonts -
are they to be made as replacements of default groff fonts
or as sets of aditional font (i.e. what names to use TR or UTR)?

Is it possible (and easy) for a document author to switch
from a set of Adobe font descriptions (TR, SS, S etc.) to
URW (UTR, USS, US etc.) if both are installed?

                 Sincerely, Michail
PS.
devps/Makefile.sub calls devps/genegate/Makefile in the following way

        $(MAKE) -f $(srcdir)/generate/Makefile \
          srcdir=$(srcdir)/generate DESC=$(srcdir)/DESC.in

But it seems that the srcdir and DESC variables provided to
generate/Makefile on the command line are ignored.

Result of some changes half-commited?

Makefile.diff
Description: Text document

zapfdr.sed
Description: Text document

symbolsl.afm
Description: Text document