TeX 1995 July/TeX CD-ROM July 1995 (Disc 1)(Walnut Creek)(1995).ISO/tex-k/tex-k-archive.past/tex-k-archive.gz/tex-k-archive/[e-mail]_Mon Dec 6 08:57:56 1993.msg

Internet Message Format | 1994-10-11 | 2KB

Received: from dutepp13.et.tudelft.nl by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA21276
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 02:04:05 -0500
Received: by dutepp13.et.tudelft.nl id AA05961
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for [e-mail]); Mon, 6 Dec 1993 08:03:55 +0100
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 07:57:56 +0100 (MET)
From: Richard Kooijman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Getting Virtual Fonts to work
To: Owen Monroe <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sat, 4 Dec 1993, Owen Monroe wrote:

> When I try using virtual fonts nothing is displayed because xdvi
> cannot handle the raw .tfm file. I seem to remember a comment made
> about this in the man page. Are you going to add this feature to
> xdvi so it can display postscript fonts that have virtual font
> representation. (Or is there a better way for me to do this?)

The lastest xdvik works great for me with virtual Postscript fonts.
I even adapted the MakeTeXPK with patches of the regular xdvi's MakeTeXPK
(added in latest beta incarnation, I believe) to generate Postscript
font representations using the stuff of Ghostscript. No modifications
are necessary to xdvik-1.4 (? anyway, the latest version).
xdvik also displays Postscript images using ghostscript.

Now there is no difference anymore between xdvik and ghostview as I am
concerned, only that xdvik is miles better to read due to its anti-aliasing.

Well, xdvik is just miles better, I think.

Let me know if you want to have a copy of that MakeTeXPK. If there
are a lot of requests I will post it here.




Richard.