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

Re: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801

To: "Walter Schmidt" <walter.schmidt@arcormail.de>, "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian.rahtz@oucs.ox.ac.uk>, "tex-fonts" <tex-fonts@math.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
From: "Berthold K.P. Horn" <bkph@ai.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 12:18:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: <375beb46375c09e9@mail.arcor-ip.de> (added by mail.arcor-ip.de)

At 05:53 PM 6/7/99 +0200, Walter Schmidt wrote:

>just some additions to what I wrote yesterday:
>
>As to the tfm's for the 8r encoding, I have clearly found out, 
>that fontinst 1.801 produces tfm's which differ from those found 
>on CTAN (lw35nfss.zip), which were, AFAIK, made using v1.800.
>
>What's wrong here?

Could you pass the two TFMs through TFtoPL to see what is different?
It may very well be something totally benign.  Or email me two such
files and I'll pass them through TFMtoAFM...

Regards, Berthold.
Berthold K.P. Horn		mailto:bkph@ai.mit.edu

Follow-Ups:
- Re: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
  - From: "Walter Schmidt" <walter.schmidt@arcormail.de>

References:
- fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
  - From: "Walter Schmidt" <walter.schmidt@arcormail.de>

Prev by Date: fontinst 1.801 -- still worse
Next by Date: Re: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
Prev by thread: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
Next by thread: Re: fontinst 1.800 vs 1.801
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread