[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#721137: ghostscript: ps2pdf produces bad pdf on x86_64 (unreadeable text)



I've just tested with ghostscript 10.02.1 and found the situation remains as 
described in 2015, below.  Specifically, I checked that:

* the four files attached in message #15 all render without issues using evince

* tp2A_scilab_N1.pdf renders fine with xpdf, but many warning are emitted on 
the console S(yntax Warning: Bad bounding box in Type 3 glyph)

* ps2pdf 10.02.1 produces a pdf file that again renders fine, but shows the same 
syntax warnings as noted above

* rendering to png (as below) works fine

-Steve

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:17:50 +0100 (CET) whoami314@free.fr wrote:

> Secondly, the pdf viewers available in Jessie are doing a better job
> at displaying this test.pdf:
>   - Evince (or actually the underlying poppler library) is now displaying 
correctly
>     this problematic pdf. Try for instance 'pdftocairo -png test.pdf 
test.png'.
>   - Xpdf is still displaying correctly these pdf, but still with the warning
>     about "Bad bounding box in Type 3 glyph".
>   - I tried to use directly gs for rendering to png, and it works fine:
>      gs -dSAFER -dNOPAUSE -sDEVICE=png16m -dTextAlphaBits=4 -dBATCH -
dGraphicsAlphaBits=4 -dQUIET -r100 -sOutputFile=test.png test.pdf
>   - The only issue left is with the mupdf viewer (or its command-line tool 
mudraw).
>     I've attached the png obtained from the original test.pdf via:
>      mudraw -o test.png test.pdf
>     It looks exactly as the earlier faulty display (three black dots instead 
of
>     the expected text) that was obtained via Wheezy's evince.
> 
> Anyway, I still think that ps2pdf is producing an erroneous pdf, and that 
the various
> pdf viewers are doing there best to overcome this issue. Indeed, as hinted 
by the
> xpdf warnings, the /FontBBox [0 0 1 -1] in test.pdf looks quite wrong.
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: