LaTeX (in-)compatibility
Hello.
Sorry for this off-topic topic. Thought, Debian
users might be interested in this also. Perhaps
someone has found a solution yet, other than
handtune many LaTeX-docs again or reuse the old
LaTeX-suite?
It seems to me that there has occured some important change in
LaTeX font generation (dvips + Metafont) as well as in vertical
spacing between version a) and version b) of LaTeX (see below).
Is this "repairable"? How could one make the system b) produce
the same output as system a)? The observed differences are:
1.) Version a) looks and feels the same as LaTeX2.09 before.
2.) Documents compiled with b) use more vertical space than a),
e. g. the same text is distributed on more pages. Most
annoying are hand-tuned pages from a). The command:
\setlength{\parskip}{1ex plus0.5ex minus0.2ex}
makes no difference.(??!)
3.) The ghostview-preview produced from b) is less readable than
that of b), given the same X11-terminal at resolution
1152x900, magstep 0. The b)-fonts look a micro bit smaller,
most horizontal bars in "t" or "f" are missing at that
resolution and the "e" is ugly as well. This point is the
most important one, for addresses the readability of
previews!!!
============================== a) ==============================
This is TeX, Version 3.1415 (C version 6.0)
LaTeX2e <1993/12/24> PRELIMINARY TEST RELEASE
This is dvipsk 5.526a Copyright 1986, 1993 Radical Eye Software
(uses: /usr/TeX/lib/texmf/dvips/config.ps,
called with options: "-D 300 -t a4 -Z" for HP-laserjet)
Ghostscript 2.6.1 (5/28/93)
ghostview 1.5
============================== b) ==============================
This is TeX, Version 3.1415 (C version 6.1)
LaTeX2e <1995/06/01> patch level 3
This is dvipsk 5.58f Copyright 1986, 1994 Radical Eye Software
(uses: the same config.ps as above)
Ghostscript 2.6.1 (5/28/93)
ghostview 1.5
================================================================
Thanks. Andreas.
--
Uni Wuppertal, FB Elektrotechnik, Tel/Fax: (0202) 439 - 3009
Andreas Wehler; email: wehler2@welfa4.elektro.uni-wuppertal.de
Reply to: