October 2007 - ntg-pdftex - NTG Mailing Lists

[ pdftex-Bugs-874 ] problem with writettf?
by noreply＠sarovar.org 11 Oct '07

11 Oct '07

Bugs item #874, was opened at 2007-10-11 14:34 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=874&group_id=106 Category: Fonts Group: v1.40.5 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stefan Becuwe (sbecuwe) Assigned to: Hartmut Henkel (hhenkel) Summary: problem with writettf? Initial Comment: Hello I'm using texlive 2007 and encountered the following problem with a truetype font: [...] {/usr/local/apps/texlive-2007/texmf/fonts/enc/ttf2pk/ba se/T1-WGL4.enc}<Auto1-Light.ttfpdflatex: ../../../../texk/web2c/pdftexdir/writettf.c:848: prepend_subset_tags: Assertion `index > 0 && index < name_record_num && fd_cur->subset_tag != ((void *)0)' failed. Upgrading pdftex to 1.40.5 still produces the same error. My previous texlive version (2005 or 2006) didn't have that problem. Replacing Auto1-Light.ttf by another ttf, such as technicn.ttf, does not result in an error. So it's probably related to the Auto1-Light.ttf file itself, but it seems the behaviour of pdftex has changed over the years... Best regards Stefan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Hartmut Henkel (hhenkel) Date: 2007-10-11 16:14 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=929 does it go away if you change in pdftex-1.40.5, writettf.c in function prepend_subset_tag() the line assert(index > 0... into assert(index >= 0...? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=874&group_id=106

1 0

[ pdftex-Bugs-874 ] problem with writettf?
by noreply＠sarovar.org 11 Oct '07

11 Oct '07

Bugs item #874, was opened at 2007-10-11 14:34 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=874&group_id=106 Category: Fonts Group: v1.40.5 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stefan Becuwe (sbecuwe) Assigned to: Hartmut Henkel (hhenkel) Summary: problem with writettf? Initial Comment: Hello I'm using texlive 2007 and encountered the following problem with a truetype font: [...] {/usr/local/apps/texlive-2007/texmf/fonts/enc/ttf2pk/ba se/T1-WGL4.enc}<Auto1-Light.ttfpdflatex: ../../../../texk/web2c/pdftexdir/writettf.c:848: prepend_subset_tags: Assertion `index > 0 && index < name_record_num && fd_cur->subset_tag != ((void *)0)' failed. Upgrading pdftex to 1.40.5 still produces the same error. My previous texlive version (2005 or 2006) didn't have that problem. Replacing Auto1-Light.ttf by another ttf, such as technicn.ttf, does not result in an error. So it's probably related to the Auto1-Light.ttf file itself, but it seems the behaviour of pdftex has changed over the years... Best regards Stefan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=874&group_id=106

1 0

increasing max_strings
by David Kastrup 10 Oct '07

10 Oct '07

Hi, because of exceeded TeX capacity, I increased the following limit in the source: svn diff Index: source/src/texk/web2c/tex.ch =================================================================== --- source/src/texk/web2c/tex.ch (Revision 241) +++ source/src/texk/web2c/tex.ch (Arbeitskopie) @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ @y @d file_name_size == maxint @d ssup_error_line = 255 -@d ssup_max_strings == 262143 +@d ssup_max_strings == 500000 {Larger values than 65536 cause the arrays consume much more memory.} @d ssup_trie_opcode == 65535 @d ssup_trie_size == @"3FFFFF Does anybody know offhand whether I can expect bad effects? After all, why would the ssup-setting not be the maximum possible value? And if there was a reason to set it that way, what other things would I have to change? I ask because the job that was now able to compile produced a corrupt PDF. There can be a number of other reasons for that, but since the run is quite slow, I'd want to have this ruled out if possible. Thanks, -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

2 2

gcc 4.1.2@ubuntu breaks pdftex
by Martin Schröder 08 Oct '07

08 Oct '07

Hi, I (and David) just spend some hours tracking down a compiler bug on Ubuntu 7.04 (gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 (Ubuntu 4.1.2-0ubuntu4)): If you compile trunk with build.sh, the resulting binary can not include pdfs (xpdf: reading PDF image failed). If I use my own build.sh, everythings fine. The difference: I set the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS to -g, while the default is -g -O2. So -O2 breaks pdftex. :-( Best Martin

4 13

Re: [NTG-pdftex] gcc 4.1.2 at ubuntu breaks pdftex
by Akira Kakuto 07 Oct '07

07 Oct '07

Hi Martin, > 2007/10/6, Akira Kakuto <kakuto(a)fsci.fuk.kindai.ac.jp>: > > I'm using the following change on Windows because > > pdftex crashes on Windows 2000 if I use non-argument > > version of GlobalParams(). > > But our patched xpdf provides GlobalParams()... I know that. If GlobalParams() is not provided, a compiler error occurs. The compiling is fine, but the provided one causes the access violation on Windows 2000 in the case of pdf inclusion. I don't know why. Best regards, Akira

1 0

Re: [NTG-pdftex] gcc 4.1.2 at ubuntu breaks pdftex
by Akira Kakuto 06 Oct '07

06 Oct '07

Hi, I'm using the following change on Windows because pdftex crashes on Windows 2000 if I use non-argument version of GlobalParams(). Probably it is not related to the present problem. Best regards, Akira --- pdftoepdf.cc.orig Mon Jul 09 19:10:07 2007 +++ pdftoepdf.cc Sat Oct 06 18:08:37 2007 @@ -678,7 +678,15 @@ float pdf_version_found, pdf_version_wanted; // initialize if (!isInit) { +// +// access violation on Windows 2000 +// in the case of GlobalParams(); +// +#ifdef WIN32 + globalParams = new GlobalParams(0); +#else globalParams = new GlobalParams(); +#endif globalParams->setErrQuiet(gFalse); isInit = gTrue; }

2 1

[ pdftex-Bugs-741 ] wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups)
by noreply＠sarovar.org 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

Bugs item #741, was opened at 2007-03-02 00:50 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106 Category: PDF inclusion Group: v1.30.0 Status: Open Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Submitted By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Assigned to: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Summary: wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups) Initial Comment: Attached is a PDF 1.4 image. When you include this to a document the output generated by pdfetex 1.30.6 the images looks different: The colors are much darker, see attached PDF result. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-03 20:51 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Fix is in the works. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-01 07:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Adding /Group to the /Page is not an option for us (and probably wrong): What should we do when we have more than one included pdf on a page and they have different /CS entries? And why does transparency in an /XObject need an entry in the /Page? The entry in the /XObject should suffice. I wouldn't be surprised if AR is faulty here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-10-01 02:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 After adding /Group << /CS /DeviceRGB /Type /Group /S /Transparency >> to the /Page object in newfile2-1.pdf it displays correctly in Acrobat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-01 01:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 The attached file newfile2-1.pdf has a copied page group, which as I now know, should be correct. Still, AR8@Linux shows different colours for it and TestSkizze.pdf . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 00:51 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > Why is this WONTFIX? Sorry, this bug was once closed when this additional info was not available. -> I reopened this bug. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 00:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 Why is this WONTFIX? I mean: > The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space > with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In > the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. So the bug is that pdftex strips out the color space. If you really think it's WONTFIX, then tell me what is the correct way of specifying the color space so that I can forward this to the Inkscape developers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-09-30 15:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. When the color space is not specified Acrobat defaults to CMYK. This results in RGB colors being converted to CMYK, blended in CMYK color space, then converted back to RGB. This will produce different results compared to blending the colors in RGB space. This problem was also reported to the cairo list: http://lists.cairographics.org/archives/cairo/2007-September/011471.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-03 19:41 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both > file, Yes and the result is correct. > while Jaws has to different results. In my eyes the Jaws results are identical but wrong. So it seems that pdftex is not the problem here, but it would be nice if pdftex could handle page groups in one of the next releases: >"PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't > handle. Ignoring it." So I'm not sure to close this bug or mark it as enhancement. Thanks for your help. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-03 15:48 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 I've attached the results of two professional RIPs: Global Graphics Jaws & Harlequin. To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both file, while Jaws has to different results. :-{ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 13:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Your document is using Page Groups (see PDF Reference 7.3.6). Including pdfs that use this is a grey area; see the notes in NEWS and pdftoepdf.cc. It works most of the times and with most RIPs. I'll look into it again, but I don't have much hope. Btw: pdftex warns you: "PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't handle. Ignoring it." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 13:05 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > problem in AR7 - but only there. But how could this be a bug in Acrobat when Adobe set the standards? Why is this correctly shown before the pdftex-run. The display is the same here in Acrobat 5 - 8 so I think they would have fixed it when it's a bug since Acrobat 5. Hmm but OK, when I open the result with GSview besides the GS bug, the color tones are correctly be displayed. So close this bug report again, when you are sure that pdftex follows here exactly the PDF-specification. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 12:57 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > It's a bug in AR; No! Acrobat is correct: I created this image with Inkscape 0.45 and exported it the as PDF. I designed e.g. the green as light green. And Acrobat 7 and 8 shows this exactly as designed while the pdftex result has wrong color tones, see the attached screenshots. (Ghostscript is btw. not able to render the PDF-image correctly - I reported this to the GS people who confirmed it.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 01:05 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 You don't say it, but I see the same problem in AR7 - but only there. It's a bug in AR; try kpdf or ghostscript instead. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106

1 0

[ pdftex-Bugs-741 ] wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups)
by noreply＠sarovar.org 01 Oct '07

01 Oct '07

Bugs item #741, was opened at 2007-03-02 00:50 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106 Category: PDF inclusion Group: v1.30.0 Status: Open Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Submitted By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Assigned to: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Summary: wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups) Initial Comment: Attached is a PDF 1.4 image. When you include this to a document the output generated by pdfetex 1.30.6 the images looks different: The colors are much darker, see attached PDF result. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-01 07:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Adding /Group to the /Page is not an option for us (and probably wrong): What should we do when we have more than one included pdf on a page and they have different /CS entries? And why does transparency in an /XObject need an entry in the /Page? The entry in the /XObject should suffice. I wouldn't be surprised if AR is faulty here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-10-01 02:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 After adding /Group << /CS /DeviceRGB /Type /Group /S /Transparency >> to the /Page object in newfile2-1.pdf it displays correctly in Acrobat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-01 01:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 The attached file newfile2-1.pdf has a copied page group, which as I now know, should be correct. Still, AR8@Linux shows different colours for it and TestSkizze.pdf . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 00:51 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > Why is this WONTFIX? Sorry, this bug was once closed when this additional info was not available. -> I reopened this bug. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 00:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 Why is this WONTFIX? I mean: > The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space > with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In > the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. So the bug is that pdftex strips out the color space. If you really think it's WONTFIX, then tell me what is the correct way of specifying the color space so that I can forward this to the Inkscape developers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-09-30 15:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. When the color space is not specified Acrobat defaults to CMYK. This results in RGB colors being converted to CMYK, blended in CMYK color space, then converted back to RGB. This will produce different results compared to blending the colors in RGB space. This problem was also reported to the cairo list: http://lists.cairographics.org/archives/cairo/2007-September/011471.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-03 19:41 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both > file, Yes and the result is correct. > while Jaws has to different results. In my eyes the Jaws results are identical but wrong. So it seems that pdftex is not the problem here, but it would be nice if pdftex could handle page groups in one of the next releases: >"PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't > handle. Ignoring it." So I'm not sure to close this bug or mark it as enhancement. Thanks for your help. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-03 15:48 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 I've attached the results of two professional RIPs: Global Graphics Jaws & Harlequin. To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both file, while Jaws has to different results. :-{ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 13:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Your document is using Page Groups (see PDF Reference 7.3.6). Including pdfs that use this is a grey area; see the notes in NEWS and pdftoepdf.cc. It works most of the times and with most RIPs. I'll look into it again, but I don't have much hope. Btw: pdftex warns you: "PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't handle. Ignoring it." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 13:05 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > problem in AR7 - but only there. But how could this be a bug in Acrobat when Adobe set the standards? Why is this correctly shown before the pdftex-run. The display is the same here in Acrobat 5 - 8 so I think they would have fixed it when it's a bug since Acrobat 5. Hmm but OK, when I open the result with GSview besides the GS bug, the color tones are correctly be displayed. So close this bug report again, when you are sure that pdftex follows here exactly the PDF-specification. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 12:57 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > It's a bug in AR; No! Acrobat is correct: I created this image with Inkscape 0.45 and exported it the as PDF. I designed e.g. the green as light green. And Acrobat 7 and 8 shows this exactly as designed while the pdftex result has wrong color tones, see the attached screenshots. (Ghostscript is btw. not able to render the PDF-image correctly - I reported this to the GS people who confirmed it.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 01:05 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 You don't say it, but I see the same problem in AR7 - but only there. It's a bug in AR; try kpdf or ghostscript instead. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106

1 0

[ pdftex-Bugs-741 ] wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups)
by noreply＠sarovar.org 01 Oct '07

01 Oct '07

Bugs item #741, was opened at 2007-03-02 10:20 You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106 Category: PDF inclusion Group: v1.30.0 Status: Open Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Submitted By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Assigned to: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Summary: wrong colors for included PDF-images (page groups) Initial Comment: Attached is a PDF 1.4 image. When you include this to a document the output generated by pdfetex 1.30.6 the images looks different: The colors are much darker, see attached PDF result. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-10-01 09:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 After adding /Group << /CS /DeviceRGB /Type /Group /S /Transparency >> to the /Page object in newfile2-1.pdf it displays correctly in Acrobat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-10-01 08:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 The attached file newfile2-1.pdf has a copied page group, which as I now know, should be correct. Still, AR8@Linux shows different colours for it and TestSkizze.pdf . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 08:21 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > Why is this WONTFIX? Sorry, this bug was once closed when this additional info was not available. -> I reopened this bug. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-10-01 08:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 Why is this WONTFIX? I mean: > The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space > with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In > the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. So the bug is that pdftex strips out the color space. If you really think it's WONTFIX, then tell me what is the correct way of specifying the color space so that I can forward this to the Inkscape developers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Adrian Johnson (ajohnson) Date: 2007-09-30 23:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4699 The file TestSkizze.pdf specifies the color blending space with "/CS /DeviceRGB" in the transparency group. In the PDF produced by pdftex this has been stripped out. When the color space is not specified Acrobat defaults to CMYK. This results in RGB colors being converted to CMYK, blended in CMYK color space, then converted back to RGB. This will produce different results compared to blending the colors in RGB space. This problem was also reported to the cairo list: http://lists.cairographics.org/archives/cairo/2007-September/011471.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-04 05:11 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both > file, Yes and the result is correct. > while Jaws has to different results. In my eyes the Jaws results are identical but wrong. So it seems that pdftex is not the problem here, but it would be nice if pdftex could handle page groups in one of the next releases: >"PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't > handle. Ignoring it." So I'm not sure to close this bug or mark it as enhancement. Thanks for your help. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-04 01:18 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 I've attached the results of two professional RIPs: Global Graphics Jaws & Harlequin. To my eye the Harlequin results are the same for both file, while Jaws has to different results. :-{ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 22:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 Your document is using Page Groups (see PDF Reference 7.3.6). Including pdfs that use this is a grey area; see the notes in NEWS and pdftoepdf.cc. It works most of the times and with most RIPs. I'll look into it again, but I don't have much hope. Btw: pdftex warns you: "PDF inclusion: Page Group detected which pdfTeX can't handle. Ignoring it." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 22:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > problem in AR7 - but only there. But how could this be a bug in Acrobat when Adobe set the standards? Why is this correctly shown before the pdftex-run. The display is the same here in Acrobat 5 - 8 so I think they would have fixed it when it's a bug since Acrobat 5. Hmm but OK, when I open the result with GSview besides the GS bug, the color tones are correctly be displayed. So close this bug report again, when you are sure that pdftex follows here exactly the PDF-specification. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Uwe Stöhr (stoehr) Date: 2007-03-02 22:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=3168 > It's a bug in AR; No! Acrobat is correct: I created this image with Inkscape 0.45 and exported it the as PDF. I designed e.g. the green as light green. And Acrobat 7 and 8 shows this exactly as designed while the pdftex result has wrong color tones, see the attached screenshots. (Ghostscript is btw. not able to render the PDF-image correctly - I reported this to the GS people who confirmed it.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martin Schröder (oneiros) Date: 2007-03-02 10:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=421 You don't say it, but I see the same problem in AR7 - but only there. It's a bug in AR; try kpdf or ghostscript instead. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: http://sarovar.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=493&aid=741&group_id=106

1 0