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 at 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 at 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