Hi Branden! On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 11:19:54PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Hi Alex, > > At 2024-03-22T18:35:02+0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > I see that Debian provides the Tinos font in some package: > > > > $ apt-file find -x Tinos.*pf > > texlive-fonts-extra: /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos-Bold.pfb > > texlive-fonts-extra: /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos-BoldItalic.pfb > > texlive-fonts-extra: /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos-Italic.pfb > > texlive-fonts-extra: /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos.pfb > > > > The above is .pfb, not .pfa, which I don't understand and may not be > > usable for our purposes, > > PFA and PFB are closely related font file formats. Reputedly, they > stand for "PostScript" (or "Printer") "Font" "ASCII" or "Binary", > respectively. PFB was much more widely used on MS-DOS, due either to > the meager disk space there, the 640kB RAM limit, or because it was > thought that the fonts would be "pirated" (or even understood) less > because the nature of their contents was less obvious. Who knows? > > Regardless, groff provides a tool for converting uncouth PFB to > civilized PFA. > > $ apropos pfbtops > pfbtops (1) - translate Printer Font Binary files to PostScript ASCII > > The grops(1) and gropdf(1) man pages in groff 1.23.0 discuss using this > tool to prepare fonts so that groff can read them. Hmmm, so I could add a Makefile target to produce this .pfa font from the packaged .pfb one, and then get gropdf(1) to use this one. --Using a Makefile pays for itself.-- The process is fast, it seems. $ time pfbtops \ /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos.pfb \ | wc -l 19570 real 0m0.012s user 0m0.015s sys 0m0.001s I'll try it. This should remove a gigantic file from the project repository. Thanks! =) > (Why not "pfbtopfa"? Ghostscript was already using that name. Why does > groff provide a tool that does the same thing? Good question. I don't > know. It is not a young program--it is old.[1] Maybe at one time groff > was portable to MS-DOS but Ghostscript was not.) Which one do you recommend? pfbtopfa(1) seems to have problems: $ pfbtopfa /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos.pfb Error: /invalidfileaccess in --file-- Operand stack: in1 (/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/google/tinos/Tinos.pfb) (r) Execution stack: %interp_exit .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- false 1 %stopped_push 1949 1 3 %oparray_pop 1948 1 3 %oparray_pop 1933 1 3 %oparray_pop 1803 1 3 %oparray_pop --nostringval-- %errorexec_pop .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- --nostringval-- Dictionary stack: --dict:746/1123(ro)(G)-- --dict:0/20(G)-- --dict:88/200(L)-- Current allocation mode is local Last OS error: Permission deniedCurrent file position is 980 GPL Ghostscript 10.03.0: Unrecoverable error, exit code 1 > > Can we similarly get the Unifont for zh_CN PDFs? > > As I understand it, GNU Unifont is a low-resolution bitmap font intended > for terminal emulators.[2] I expect it would look offensively bad when > typeset. That's the font Deri used in his patch: <https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/2607548.uBY7QHFjlC@pip/> I guess that's better than nothing. Have a lovely day! Alex > > Regards, > Branden > > [1] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/NEWS?h=1.23.0#n3211 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2tgZCabTzs > [2] https://unifoundry.com/unifont/index.html -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/> Looking for a remote C programming job at the moment.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
