[fptex] mktexpk

[Bob Howlett]

Fabrice Popineau wrote:
> 
> * Bob Howlett <bobh@maths.usyd.edu.au> writes:
> 
> > Repeating the question I asked last week: why is gsftopk used for pk
> > generation rather than metafont in cases when there is a metafont
> > source available?
> 
> Because this choice has  been made for teTeX and  TeXLive quite a long
> time ago. Using type1 fonts over  mf fonts whenever possible. The only
> drawback   is  for  xdvi/windvi  when     you   need  to geenrate   pk
> glyphs.  However, the  current xdvik has   support for type1 fonts, so
> maybe windvi will benefit from it.
> 
> Fabrice


Isn't the the line
p +bsr.map
in config.ps commented out by default? 

Anyway, it seems to me that using type 1 fonts in your documents
shouldn't
stop you from from using metafont to generate pk files when you need to
generate pk files for some reason. Using gsftopk to generate a cm font
means that you are making a pk font to be a close copy of a type 1 font
that was created by closely copying a pk font ... 
Changes to ghostscript have caused the mktexpk mechanism to break on
two separate occasions I can remember, and maybe it will happen again.
So why not simply use metafont for pk generation whenever possible?

Bob