> >> >And having mktex{mf,tfm,pk}
> >> >writing to a scratch directory defeats the purpose of making the fonts
> >> >directory read only, as anyone could then create a corrupt font file
> >> >in the scratch directory and run mktexupd.
> >>
> >> This is a problem, but isn't there some simple, efficient way to
> >> validate font files?
> >
> >Yes: recreate them and compare the outputs. You don't want to just
> >check that the files are valid, but also that they have the correct
> >content.
>
> Ok, I give up, we do have to do it your way.
Yes, it's something I struggled with a few years ago in our department
where corrupt fonts had been created: there was no simple way to
determine this fact without recreating them. (You could compare the
embedded checksums with those in the corresponding tfm, but how do you
know that is correct if the tfm is also autogenerated?)
Still tough, though.
Julian
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, QMW, Univ. of London. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU/Linux Developer. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-*- Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for my PGP public key. -*-
