Bug#131336: more information

[Stefan Ulrich <stefan.ulrich@dsl.pipex.com>]

Matt Swift <swift@alum.mit.edu> writes:

> As of tetex-bin 2.0.2-3, this bug is still present.

(FWIW, I didn't see this bug before - I only recently subscribed
to debian-tetex-maint, and had never seen any bug reports from
Debian before. They never seemed to get reported upstream.)

> Also, the setting of the X resource XDvi.not1lib and/or
> XDvi*not1lib to "true" or "false" has no effect on the program.

Righto, that's a typo in xdvi.c. It's no longer present in the
current xdvik-22.74.2. The resource name was meant to be changed
to `t1lib' instead of `not1lib', for consistency with the other
resource names/options (e.g. `-nogrey'). FWIW, using
XDvi*T1lib: false
should work with xdvik-22.40v (the uppercase resource name is
typed correctly).

> The following test file demonstrates that some fonts look very bad with
> t1lib and look good without it.
[...]
> \documentclass{article}
> \renewcommand\normalsize{\fontsize{5pt}{6pt}\selectfont}
> \begin{document}
> \sffamily
> Hello world.
> \end{document}

I can't see any difference in output between `xdvi -not1lib' and
`xdvi' with xdvik-22.40v, which AFAIK is the version used in
tetex-2.0.2 (please verify with `xdvi.bin -version'). What's
the problem with the display?

Otherwise, if the xdvi used is really an older version, this sounds
like a duplicate of #171344 to me.

Best,
Stefan