DVIPS woes

[Sebastian Rahtz]

Taco Hoekwater writes:
 >  SR> a change in dvips means that the BaKoMa fonts break the partial
 >  SR> downloading code. maddening, but true. there are cleaned versions
 >  SR> on the TeX Live CD
 > 
 > This is not really fair. The bug is in dvips, not in the fonts. There
 > have been bugs in dvips' pfb/pfa font handling for as long as I
 > remember. The reason is simple: dvips does *not* parse the Type1
 > fonts. Instead the code is based on 'common practise' binary snippets
 > that incidentally work OK ('standard' Adobe and Gs fonts).

I do accept this correction. the BaKoMa fonts were/are perfectly
valid, and dvips is broken. Tom Rokicki knows it, and would like to
rewrite the t1 partial handling, but does not have the time. If anyone 
wanted to rewrite that bit, he'd be very happy

sebastian