[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: First impressions: strange groff default font behaviour after system
From: |
G. Branden Robinson |
Subject: |
Re: First impressions: strange groff default font behaviour after system upgrade |
Date: |
Mon, 18 Dec 2023 15:07:16 -0600 |
Hi Oliver,
At 2023-12-18T21:57:07+0100, Oliver Corff wrote:
> Enter groff 1.23.0. I compiled the same file again (a translation which
> I had finished just this morning, not knowing what an escape I had*),
> and alas! things took an unexpected course. First I looked for the
> appearance of ≤ and was astonished to see that not only was it
> invisible, it was truly invisible as no placeholder box appeared; blank
> space was there, at least. Then I noticed strange holes in the text ---
> the Greek letters did not show up either. Again, no placeholder box,
> just white space.
>
> So, this is a brand-new Fedora 39 installation with groff version
> 1.23.0, the URW fonts being found in /usr/share/fons/urw-base35/.
>
> My first question: Is this new behaviour intended?
Probably not. Oddly, not much earlier today, we got a similar report
from T. Kurt Bond about the URW fonts being troublesome--as in, not
found--in a groff build from source on Fedora 39.
So something would appear to be amiss. I'm hoping Deri can help us
figure it out.
> If so, what I am I supposed to do?
>
> If not, what kind of tests and diagnostics should I conduct?
>
> If I compile a minimal ms document like
>
> .PP
> 1≤2
>
> I can copy and paste the white space between 1 and 2 from the resulting
> pdf document, and lo and behold, it is a "≤" !
Your copy and paste operation is going through the PDF's "CMap" feature,
which narrows things down a little. Maybe the font needs to be embedded
but it isn't? I'm just stabbing in the dark here. gropdf's `-e` option
will embed all fonts. If that fixes the problem, then the issue would
appear to be that the PDF _viewer_ programs on Fedora 39 are not finding
the URW fonts, not that groff isn't.
> And, as a side-note, there is a typo in refer(1), right in the first
> line(2) of ther first contiguous paragraph: "a preprocessor that
> prepares bibilographic citations".
Since fixed. Expect the correct spelling in groff 1.24.
commit 306441e44693a503eb12df483f59f68844d205d6
Author: G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>
AuthorDate: Tue Sep 12 04:25:48 2023 -0500
Regards,
Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: First impressions: strange groff default font behaviour after system upgrade, Deri, 2023/12/18