Your message dated Thu, 19 May 2022 23:33:15 +0200 with message-id <4e79f475-b098-c405-6c4d-a8abaf55b751@web.de> and subject line Re: Bug#990380: texlive-binaries: pstricks \rput item placement incorrect (xdvipdfmx?) has caused the Debian Bug report #990380, regarding texlive-binaries: pstricks \rput item placement incorrect (xdvipdfmx?) to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 990380: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=990380 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: texlive-binaries: pstricks \rput item placement incorrect (xdvipdfmx?)
- From: Dean Serenevy <dean@serenevy.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2021 17:14:25 -0400
- Message-id: <162482846529.518333.6879214240877639376.reportbug@tsalmoth.serenevy.net>
Package: texlive-binaries Version: 2020.20200327.54578-7 Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: dean@serenevy.net Dear Maintainer, After upgrading to bullseye from buster, several of my latex documents are not compiling correctly. The problem occurs in files using pstricks and compiling into PDF documents. Example: \documentclass{article} \usepackage{pstricks} \begin{document} \fbox{ \psset{unit=1in} \begin{pspicture}(0,0)(1,1) \rput[tl](0,1){TOP} \rput[bl](0,0){BOTTOM} \end{pspicture} } \end{document} If compiled via: xelatex FILENAME.tex # incorrect output or latex FILENAME.tex ; dvipdfmx FILENAME.dvi # incorrect output the resulting document places the "BOTTOM" text directly above the "TOP" text when they should be about 1 inch apart with TOP on top. When compiled to PostScript the document looks correct: latex FILENAME.tex ; dvips FILENAME.dvi # correct output The behavior appears to be the same problem reported in [1], in that compiling the stack overflow document produces the same incorrect output shown on the site. Though the comments on that post suggest that the problem was a known issue and would be fixed in texlive 2020 (which is the version in bullseye). The comments in that posting claim the problem was in xdvipdfmx which is why I am filing this bug against texlive-binaries. [1] https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/516100/problem-with-rput-command-with-xelatex-and-pstricks Thank you for your time and consideration, I can provide more information or testing if needed. - Dean Serenevy -- System Information: Debian Release: 11.0 APT prefers testing-security APT policy: (500, 'testing-security'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-7-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_WARN, TAINT_FIRMWARE_WORKAROUND Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled Versions of packages texlive-binaries depends on: ii dpkg 1.20.9 ii install-info 6.7.0.dfsg.2-6 ii libc6 2.31-12 ii libcairo2 1.16.0-5 ii libfontconfig1 2.13.1-4.2 ii libfreetype6 2.10.4+dfsg-1 ii libgcc-s1 10.2.1-6 ii libgraphite2-3 1.3.14-1 ii libharfbuzz0b 2.7.4-1 ii libicu67 67.1-6 ii libkpathsea6 2020.20200327.54578-7 ii libmpfr6 4.1.0-3 ii libpaper1 1.1.28+b1 ii libpixman-1-0 0.40.0-1 ii libpng16-16 1.6.37-3 ii libptexenc1 2020.20200327.54578-7 ii libstdc++6 10.2.1-6 ii libsynctex2 2020.20200327.54578-7 ii libteckit0 2.5.10+ds1-3 ii libtexlua53 2020.20200327.54578-7 ii libtexluajit2 2020.20200327.54578-7 ii libx11-6 2:1.7.1-1 ii libxaw7 2:1.0.13-1.1 ii libxi6 2:1.7.10-1 ii libxmu6 2:1.1.2-2+b3 ii libxpm4 1:3.5.12-1 ii libxt6 1:1.2.0-1 ii libzzip-0-13 0.13.62-3.3 ii perl 5.32.1-4 ii t1utils 1.41-4 ii tex-common 6.16 ii zlib1g 1:1.2.11.dfsg-2 Versions of packages texlive-binaries recommends: pn dvisvgm <none> ii texlive-base 2020.20210202-3 texlive-binaries suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 990380-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#990380: texlive-binaries: pstricks \rput item placement incorrect (xdvipdfmx?)
- From: Hilmar Preuße <hille42@web.de>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 23:33:15 +0200
- Message-id: <4e79f475-b098-c405-6c4d-a8abaf55b751@web.de>
- In-reply-to: <48e30ffe-08d8-23ff-395e-c6976702adf4@serenevy.net>
- References: <162482846529.518333.6879214240877639376.reportbug@tsalmoth.serenevy.net> <6ff1d36c-5853-b2ba-35f1-8ac616bfe6fd@web.de> <162482846529.518333.6879214240877639376.reportbug@tsalmoth.serenevy.net> <48e30ffe-08d8-23ff-395e-c6976702adf4@serenevy.net>
Am 17.01.2022 um 03:10 teilte Dean Serenevy mit: Hi, closing the issue then. HilmarI can confirm that everything seems to be OK in the latest testing versions, so things look fine going forward. As for Debian bullseye/stable (which I think is out of scope by now, but others finding this bug may want some info), back-porting ghostscript 9.55.0 to bullseye doesn't help. The easiest fix I've found for bullseye is pinning/forcing ghostscript to the latest buster binary (9.27~dfsg-2+deb10u5 at the time of this writing). Thanks for following up and I'm glad it will all work well in bookworm!-- sigfaultAttachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---