Bug#425405: Not a bug
Hi,
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I agree that this is unlikely a bug in Ghostscript.
>
> The test PDF provided by Jonathan Nieder _is_ searchable with Evince
> 3.38.2-1.
>
> If same file was not searchable with Evince available in January 2011,
> then the issue might be the encoding of the strings in the PDF, or it
> might be something else that confused that older release of Evince.
>
> But that test file was produced by LibreOffice. I would expect that a
> file generated by cups-pdf would instead have cups-pdf as creator in the
> metadata.
>
> I therefore suspect that the test PDF file should be ignored for this
> issue, and that the originally reported issue is a different one:
[...]
> For the record: If you suspect that an issue is in Ghostscript then
> please provide the ghostscript command that causes this issue - without
> that the only possible action is to tag it as unreproducible and close
> it, which is not really helpful.
This response is puzzling. The example that I produced was a simple
postscript file and then a ps2pdf command that invokes ghostscript to
produce this issue. I don't understand why you're insisting
simultaneously that I should have
- used cups-pdf instead of using ghostscript directly
- used ghostscript directly instead of using a larger pipeline that
invokes it
since I don't see how those are possible to do at the same time.
[...]
> Ghostscript primarily renders a "painting" and secondarily preserves as
> metadata high-level information like strings of text and color spaces.
>
> One way metadata is lost is if CUPS filters use Postsript as
> intermediary format. That was the case in the past but the default
> should nowadays use PDF as intermediary format.
This analysis seems spot-on; I think you have correctly described the
issue.
[...]
> This issue is highly likely a duplicate of 847462 - thus merging.
IIUC that bug was fixed by switching to the pdftocairo renderer.
Thanks much, this makes a lot of sense to me.
Sincerely,
Jonathan
Reply to: