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

Re: please test proposed updates on lenny!!

On So, 10 Mai 2009, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> I've downloaded the tfm files from CTAN; they're identical to these
> in your package:

Yes, that is fine. They OLD version of packages contained wrong tfm
files, as did texlive itself for long time.

> What makes me wonder: the time stamp of the tfm files on CTAN is
> 1995-08-14 02:00:

Not a problem, it seemed that at some point the tfm files were wrongly
recreated in texlive, we don't know where why when.

> Unfortunately the submitter did not say *what* has changed in the tfm
> files. Maybe a special kerning pair was fixed and I have to have that

The baseline differed a small amount, I attached the original email to
the texlive mailing list.

Best wishes


Dr. Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>        Vienna University of Technology
Debian Developer <preining@debian.org>                         Debian TeX Group
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094      fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
Dalarymples are the things you pay extra for on pieces of hand-made
craftwork - the rough edges, the paint smudges and the holes in the
			--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
--- Begin Message ---

the LaTeX test suite uncovered a problem with at least one tfm file, namely 
lcircle10.tfm from the latex-fonts package. For example, character 27 (O 33) 
should have these metrics:

   (CHARWD R 2.8)
   (CHARHT R 1.42)
   (CHARDP R 1.38)

(freshly generated by mktextfm a few minutes ago),

but the version in texlive has

   (CHARWD R 2.8)
   (CHARHT R 1.4249935)
   (CHARDP R 1.375008)

Note that the baseline is shifted by 0.025pt.

A quick glance over the tftopl output shows the same shift for a lot of the 

I'd be interested to understand how this happened.

 For the LaTeX Team
   Rainer Schöpf

--- End Message ---

Reply to: