[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular.
From: |
Ralph Corderoy |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular. |
Date: |
Tue, 03 May 2016 11:38:03 +0100 |
Hi Werner,
> Hmm. It seems that Arch Linux doesn't set up the URW fonts. Bad.
They deliberately try to alter upstream as little as possible, AIUI.
https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk?h=packages/groff
shows the PKGBUILD file that defines how to build the upstream source.
Is there some groff configuration that is missing to have the U foundry
appear, or is it more the distribution has to apply its knowledge of
what fonts from where are available and tailor devpdf/download?
> Attached is what I get for input file `z.tr' containing
...
> groff -P -y -P U -Tpdf z.tr > z.pdf
Ah, no mention of Times, and Nimbus embedded. It's a big file though,
~120,000 bytes compared with ~4,000 if -Tps and ps2pdf is used to also
embed Nimbus. I guess the latter picks just certain runes?
And that's with gropdf, the ditroff → PDF stage. Presuambly, troff has
used Times' metrics before that? (It could well be the metric
differences are minute and there just to avoid copyright hassle?)
Cheers, Ralph.
- [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Ralph Corderoy, 2016/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Ted Harding, 2016/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Werner LEMBERG, 2016/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Deri James, 2016/05/03
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Ralph Corderoy, 2016/05/05
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Deri James, 2016/05/05
- Re: [Groff] Times-Roman v. Nimbus Roman No9 L Regular., Ralph Corderoy, 2016/05/06