[tex-k] dvips not embedding all fonts as directed

Matthew Lovell lovell@fc.hp.com
Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:23:14 -0700

(My apologies for getting my posted to the list out-of-order.)


I have a latex file which uses Palatino as the main text (via the
mathpazo package).  I own the base Palatino fonts from Adobe and have
setup the map file as directed by mathpazo's instructions.

 dvips(k) 5.86e
 mathpazo 2002/04/24 PSNFSS-v9.0
 LaTeX2e  2001/06/01

  pplb8r Palatino-Bold <8r.enc <pplb8a.pfb " TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont "
  pplr8r Palatino-Roman <8r.enc <pplr8a.pfb " TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont "
  pplri8r Palatino-Italic <8r.enc <pplri8a.pfb " TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont "
  pplbi8r Palatino-BoldItalic <8r.enc <pplbi8a.pfb " TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont "
  fplmr PazoMath <fplmr.pfb
  fplmri PazoMath-Italic <fplmri.pfb
  fplmb PazoMath-Bold <fplmb.pfb
  fplmbi PazoMath-BoldItalic <fplmbi.pfb
  fplmbb PazoMathBlackboardBold <fplmbb.pfb

I am noticing some inconsistent behavior from dvips conversion -- not
all the fonts used are getting included in the .ps file.  (I've been
"peeking" by grep'ing for BeginFont in the resulting PostScript.
These results seem consistent with what Acrobat distiller reports.)

For small files, I see no problems.  I've seen Palatino-Roman and
Palatino-Bold both get embedded together fine.

A have a slightly large file, though, which is dropping
Palatino-Bold.  As I move \end{document} earlier, I see Palatino-Bold
included but Palatino-Roman dropped!!

This behavior is only happening with the Adobe Palatino fonts.  If I
use the URW fonts, with the mapping shown below, I have yet to see a

  pplb8r URWPalladioL-Bold "TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplb8a.pfb
  pplbi8r URWPalladioL-BoldItal "TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplbi8a.pfb
  pplbo8r URWPalladioL-Bold ".167 SlantFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplb8a.pfb
  pplbu8r URWPalladioL-BoldItal "-.1763 SlantFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplbi8a.pfb
  pplr8r URWPalladioL-Roma "TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplr8a.pfb
  pplr8rn URWPalladioL-Roma ".82 ExtendFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplr8a.pfb
  pplri8r URWPalladioL-Ital "TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplri8a.pfb
  pplro8r URWPalladioL-Roma ".167 SlantFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplr8a.pfb
  pplrr8re URWPalladioL-Roma "1.2 ExtendFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplr8a.pfb
  pplru8r URWPalladioL-Ital "-.1763 SlantFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <uplri8a.pfb

I believe I have followed the fontinst directions correctly, since
both fonts seem to "work".  The inconsistent dvips behavior has me
baffled though.

Any insights?


Matthew Lovell
HP Systems and VLSI Technology