On Thursday, 18 August 2022 03:00:21 BST Peter Schaffter wrote:
> Deri --
>
> > I don't think the site_font download file for devpdf requires the
> > Euro stuff repeated, so long as it is in the system download file
> > already. Gropdf already searches in all expected font directories
> > for download files and builds a map in memory.
>
> Odd. At my end, gropdf doesn't recognise \[eu] without the Euro
> stuff. No problem with €, though.
I can't duplicate this. In my site-font I have the Google Tinos fonts with
just four entries in the download file. In the system font directory, the
download file has this entry:-
FreeEuro ../devps/freeeuro.pfa
Plus all the other pdf fonts. It also has many other esoteric fonts, like:-
3Of9Barcode 3OF9.pfa
If I test using TinosR and the glyphs \[eu] and \[Eu], both are visible (but
different). If I then switch font to 3of9 it prints the barcode.
If I do the same but using -T ps the \[eu] and the barcode is missing.
Interestingly, if I change the font to TR rather than TinosR so that groff is
only using the system font directory it still reads the site-font download
file, so it fails.
I think the rule of thumb is that if you use site-font for devps do not change
anything in the system directory, whereas for devpdf the two directories can
be treated separately, you should not be copying stuff from the system
directory to the site directory for gropdf.
If you still find you need to copy stuff from system to site on your setup,
please can you zip up both directories so I can investigate.
> > There is probably no problem with duplicating the entry. Currently
> > duplicates overwrite and it searches in the order -F dir,
> > $GROFF_FONTPATH (from the environment), then the "standard"
> > places, site_font, system font, /usr/lib/ font.
>
> I haven't experienced any problem with the duplication.
If, after installing a new version of groff, any of the font files were
different in the system directory you may see anomalies. It is safer not to
duplicate.
