On Fri, 19 Oct 2018, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mercredi 17 octobre 2018 à 14:03 -0400, R P Herrold a écrit :
>
> > But something is missing, I believe, formerly carried in a
> > pre-refactoring urw- font package:
> >
> > This is one candidate PDF which provokes the stderr messages
> > below:
>
> Hi,
>
> I haven't used xpdf for years (I understand some poor people need it for
> pdf forms and such things)
I am not sure how that indicates 'poor' ... 'unfortunate',
perhaps, as that is indeed the use case I face, for government
PDF fillable forms, and insurance company PDF forms
> That or a bit of xpdf is still unable to process Opentype fonts in 2018,
> and will fail if there is no Postscript 1 font on system for the
> standard PS font families.
I suspect the latter as the problem began after urw-base35
displaced the former (Type 1 bearing) urw-fonts, and thus my
wish for:
> I would _like_ to have the old URW fontset back,
> unsatisfactory as it is considered in modern practice,
> present and working, but at whatever the lowest preferance
> priority is, so that I have the old PDF base series exact
> matched
It seems to be about 5 MBy in size. But bigger font sets seem
to be present and were dragged in by some pacakge as listed in
installed as a dependency:
$ rpm -qa --qf "%{size} %{name} \n" | grep "fonts" | sort -n
...
5395167 dejavu-sans-fonts
by: python-matplotlib, gnuplot, and libreoffice-core
6211653 texlive-amsfonts
by: lots of LaTeX packages
7179431 xorg-x11-fonts-misc
by: xosd
11442067 lato-fonts
by: python2-sphinx_rtd_theme
and the user experience is ... horrible.
Actually, and frankly, it was disabling and non-usable -- see
the prior email from me with screen shots. As a work-around,
I initiall solved the problem by doing the work on a Windows
10 box, and an OS/X install
I see the discussion at:
https://www.adobe.com/products/type/opentype/opentype-T1-faq.html
and understand it, but the Real World still has documents
bearing this stuff, and one needs to see it to do real work
[I think, also, it is not unreasonable to attend to getting
xpdf quieter, and using the new namings ... I will look]
Is having the Type 1 font available but of a lowest priority,
an unreasonable request?
(FWIW: I later worked around the issue locally by building and
installing a fork: urw-fonts-local from an ancient
retired/netwinder/SRPMS/nw/9/9/urw-fonts-2.0-29.src.rpm
http://gallery.herrold.com/stuff/urw-fonts.spec
and now with the test file:
http://gallery.herrold.com/stuff/ibm-rest-cloud-api-20180727.pdf
only have as error noise:
Config Error: No display font for 'ZapfDingbats'
seemingly a proprietary Adobe (pissobly ITC) Type 1 only font
)
-- Russ herrold
_______________________________________________
fonts mailing list -- fonts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to fonts-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/fonts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
