Hi,
I've been using LaTeX for a few years on Mac OS X, and I'd like to use it on CentOS now. I installed a complete environment using 'yum groupinstall "Authoring and Publishing"' and then installing tetex-xdvi, plus manually installing the 'memoir' class.
I can run 'latex document.tex' ok: the resulting .dvi looks nice in xdvi. When running 'dvips -o document.dvi', I get a .ps file that I can view OK in Evince.
But when I run 'pdflatex document.tex', the fonts in the resulting PDF are all ragged and fuzzy... though the print output is OK.
I thought I'd rather post this question here, since the answer is probably distribution-specific.
Any suggestions?
Niki
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:20:44 +0100 Niki Kovacs contact@kikinovak.net wrote:
But when I run 'pdflatex document.tex', the fonts in the resulting PDF are all ragged and fuzzy... though the print output is OK.
What are you using to view the pdf with? Have you tried viewing it with something else?
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Niki Kovacs wrote:
I can run 'latex document.tex' ok: the resulting .dvi looks nice in xdvi. When running 'dvips -o document.dvi', I get a .ps file that I can view OK in Evince.
But when I run 'pdflatex document.tex', the fonts in the resulting PDF are all ragged and fuzzy... though the print output is OK.
known issue; using a similar creation chain, see the xpdf (left) and Evince (right) rendering of the same file: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=291595
I thought I'd rather post this question here, since the answer is probably distribution-specific.
I filed a bug upstream, as Evince is a poor second to xpdf. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428677
CentOS 5 carries an older version:
$ rpm -q evince evince-0.6.0-8.el5
I see at the prime upstrream site at the Gnome project: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/evince/2.21/ LATEST-IS-2.21.91 11-Feb-2008
Sadly there is no embeded .spec file for easy building
RawHide at Red Hat carries it, but it has a hard dependency chain as packaged for C5, without some major build environment surgery
[herrold@centos-5 evince]$ rpmbuild --rebuild evince-2.21.91-2.fc9.src.rpm Installing evince-2.21.91-2.fc9.src.rpm error: Failed build dependencies: glib2-devel >= 2.15.0 is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 poppler-glib-devel >= 0.5.9 is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 nautilus-devel is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 libspectre-devel is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 gnome-doc-utils is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 gnome-icon-theme >= 2.17.1 is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 kpathsea-devel is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 djvulibre-devel is needed by evince-2.21.91-2.x86_64 [herrold@centos-5 evince]$
Trying the tarball route, I get a roadblock in the pkgconfig phase of the ./configure
configure: error: gnome-doc-utils >= 0.3.2 not found
from this line:
configure:gdu_cv_version_required=0.3.2
Short circuiting that, I get:
checking for LIB... configure: error: Package requirements (gtk+-2.0 >= 2.10.0 libxml-2.0 >= 2.5.0 gio-2.0 >= 2.15.4) were not met:
As I say, major surgery.
I don't understand the mindset of 'latest and greatest featuritis', and REALLY don't understand the urge to huge 'one monolithic tool to do much' as it is so contrary and hostile to the 'nix "small competent tools" history of a classical UNIX environment, but it is the way of the world ;(
I use xpdf, as a result, and find that it works very well, as always.
-- Russ herrold
R P Herrold a écrit :
known issue; using a similar creation chain, see the xpdf (left) and Evince (right) rendering of the same file: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=291595
Curiously enough, the problem disappears when I just leave out \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} and don't specify anything.
RawHide at Red Hat carries it, but it has a hard dependency chain as packaged for C5, without some major build environment surgery
That's one reason why I turned my back on both GNOME and KDE, and opted for XFCE which is so much more modular and tools-philosophy-compliant in its approach. I'm using plain GTK apps as much as I can, so yeah, why not xpdf...
Cheers,
Niki
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008, Niki Kovacs wrote:
R P Herrold a écrit :
known issue; using a similar creation chain, see the xpdf (left) and Evince (right) rendering of the same file: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=291595
Curiously enough, the problem disappears when I just leave out \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} and don't specify anything.
interesting ... I commented out '\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}', rebuilt my sample case filed in that bug, and at 400% I do not get jaggies any more either: http://www.herrold.com/evince-400.jpg
So the takeaway is that evince does not handle explicit font encodings as well as xpdf; because font encodings are a fact of life, that may help the upstream 'fix' evince's rendering when 'fontenc' is present.
I have updated my upstream bug with new attachments. Thank you.
That's one reason why I turned my back on both GNOME and KDE, and opted for XFCE which is so much more modular and tools-philosophy-compliant in its approach. I'm using plain GTK apps as much as I can, so yeah, why not xpdf...
I am a long time, and well known XFCE adherent and advocate in the CentOS IRC channel, and before. Some screenshots over tiem: http://www.herrold.com/axis2100-webcam.png (custom thin client distro for a client's call center, partially based on RHL 7.2 and LTSP) http://www.owlriver.com/support/wings/sparc-xfce.png (pre CentOS, unnamed personal distribution on Sparc based on Aurora 1, pre RHL 8) http://www.herrold.com/snapshot31.png (on cAos 1, which had centos as a sub project back a the very beginnings of centos -- HORRIBLE fonting in that X-top was the reason for the shot) http://www.herrold.com/caos2-xfce.png (on cAos 2 -- fonting issues solved, and centos up and starting) http://www.herrold.com/xfce-406-centos34.png (early centos) http://www.herrold.com/xfce42-centos5.jpg (today with a couple of xpdf, and a freedesktop.org 'brag' shot up)
As you are probably aware, at XFCE 4 became an 'early adopter' of those standards. http://www.xfce.org/about/ and 'aims to be fast and lightweight' unlike, say, evince, which tries to be a universal 'Swiss Army' document 'knife' ;)
XFCE forever
- Russ herrold
R P Herrold a écrit :
As you are probably aware, at XFCE 4 became an 'early adopter' of those standards. http://www.xfce.org/about/ and 'aims to be fast and lightweight' unlike, say, evince, which tries to be a universal 'Swiss Army' document 'knife' ;)
XFCE forever
I second that. I've been using XFCE since 4.0 on Slackware. I've spent quite some time configuring an XFCE-based desktop which could be a complete replacement for, say, Windows XP or Mac OS X. Now here's what my somewhat customized XFCE looks like:
http://www.kikinovak.net/images/centos5-xfce.png
This is the standard desktop I've installed in our public libraries, and so far, folks have adopted it. After logging in, the desktop launches and consumes no more than 57 MB RAM (compare: over 600 MB for Windows Vista :oD).
The only thing I painfully miss is a burning app in replacement for K3B.
Cheers,
Niki
-
Frank Cox -
Niki Kovacs -
R P Herrold