From unknown Fri Jun 20 18:15:42 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#52979 <52979@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#52979 <52979@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts Reply-To: bug#52979 <52979@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 01:15:42 +0000 retitle 52979 Modular texlive has problems finding fonts reassign 52979 guix submitter 52979 Jelle Licht severity 52979 normal thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 03 11:18:11 2022 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Jan 2022 16:18:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35992 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Q2E-000075-Rm for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 11:18:11 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:46672) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Q2B-00006t-5A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 11:18:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48122) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Q2A-0006Ua-Fz for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 11:18:07 -0500 Received: from mail2.fsfe.org ([213.95.165.55]:46370) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Q28-0007GE-9o for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 11:18:06 -0500 From: Jelle Licht DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fsfe.org; s=2021081301; t=1641226682; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type; bh=5rg8BR7E0RErxJX8JOdzPnSvUcxUCY3I0vITH3fmd4M=; b=WmlfqPjmN6+eFRRGEbudB27tgR5LETtxMOtoCJvnfhskCF5l7+MacDDYLCsVpBNZP1n1va DejYlnj7juf+b3KPs+chF24jTTHn1rVyiWhCIyyVG7yvpBcmx33hdxKZfpZzT+JpAqZq1A YADQABXiPC71Di8b/RUweE2WgnI7f5U= To: bug-guix@gnu.org Subject: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts X-Debbugs-CC: Ricardo Wurmus Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 17:18:01 +0100 Message-ID: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=213.95.165.55; envelope-from=jlicht@fsfe.org; helo=mail2.fsfe.org X-Spam_score_int: -1 X-Spam_score: -0.2 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.2 / 5.0 requ) DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) As discussed on #guix on IRC, several folks including myself ran into issues getting the following some-file.tex: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- \documentclass[11pt]{article} \begin{document} Hello friends \end{document} --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- ... to typeset with the following manifest.scm: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (specifications->manifest '("texlive-base" "texlive-fonts-ec" "texlive-amsfonts" "texlive-fira" "texlive-inconsolata")) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- ... with command: `guix shell --pure coreutils grep sed gawk -m manifest.scm -- pdflatex some-file Note that the monolithic texlive seems to work: `guix shell --pure coreutils grep sed gawk texlive -- pdflatex some-file' On IRC, rekado /w strace identified that texlive does not seem to be entering the subdirectory containing the font files, as it seems to be loading texlive-bin's texmf.cnf, instead of the one generated by `(@ (guix profiles) texlive-configuration)'. It seems some of the talks in the guix-maintenance repository can currently also not be built for the same or similar reason. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 03 12:06:11 2022 Received: (at 52979) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Jan 2022 17:06:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36077 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Qmh-0001VY-6u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 12:06:11 -0500 Received: from mail2.fsfe.org ([213.95.165.55]:34576) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4Qme-0001VP-OB for 52979@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Jan 2022 12:06:10 -0500 From: Jelle Licht DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fsfe.org; s=2021081301; t=1641229567; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oXHDOfrHkz5JWTsZ1IgURP3EC+4DzyFnaQksMJmbTDA=; b=PaUdTPwOTlFcHbKKBwaPtujXw42h7Q4IW9R7MdTHWmPuyKZp6Xf8hHNg//jPTtTHPwMuTz Zdk400iy7Oa+PsnJHJilvljq+sIYcoxikD14tDyk6DDgafS4vG3aHEKx4tP+F0ZQgKMx76 RO5TQqL4Mm55IvX7fd5CbBpBuEJ9jNY= To: 52979@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#52979: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts In-Reply-To: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> References: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 18:06:06 +0100 Message-ID: <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52979 Cc: Ricardo Wurmus X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Jelle Licht writes: > As discussed on #guix on IRC, several folks including myself ran into > issues getting the following some-file.tex: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > \documentclass[11pt]{article} > \begin{document} > Hello friends > \end{document} > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > ... to typeset with the following manifest.scm: > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > (specifications->manifest > '("texlive-base" > "texlive-fonts-ec" > "texlive-amsfonts" > "texlive-fira" > "texlive-inconsolata")) > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > ... with command: > `guix shell --pure coreutils grep sed gawk -m manifest.scm -- pdflatex some-file > > Note that the monolithic texlive seems to work: > `guix shell --pure coreutils grep sed gawk texlive -- pdflatex some-file' > > On IRC, rekado /w strace identified that texlive does not seem to be > entering the subdirectory containing the font files, as it seems to be > loading texlive-bin's texmf.cnf, instead of the one generated by > `(@ (guix profiles) texlive-configuration)'. The first part here is correct, the second part is not; It seems texlive's kpathsea uses a heuristic to determine if a directory is a 'leaf node', where it checks whether there are exactly 2 links in there[1]; since symlinks do not count towards the link count, a directory filled with only symlinks to other directories is seen as a leaf node, and traversal subsequently ends there. This heuristic is a performance optimisation, as simply doing stat calls of everything in a directory is slow, according the the kpathsea authors. We can disable this optimisation by setting ST_NLINK_TRICK at compile time. Alternatively, we could try to figure out a way in which our directory-of-symlinks also contains at least one file. [1]: That is, "." and ".." From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 04 02:52:22 2022 Received: (at 52979) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2022 07:52:22 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36918 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4ecI-0002YF-LI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 02:52:22 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.188.51]:21166) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4ecG-0002Y6-KC for 52979@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 02:52:21 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1641282737; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=BqC4tQFzwIhIyPTcNANkYI16sNOTHyFJdEEl4Co/uVFsqNiwuHTOEsYUhZe5Vcb6jDl18G4B3eqjZ2ZBBrknKVRjeSMoXZNcUrsORcQ0dxkWctchuJ2kyIzz5dUNwWt/CNhivq+bYRF6mY7lwsKQJNfJQ1dwzDkk8drmevILZS0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1641282737; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=oTqBzxX1GmqRHMsD7QTspPr4+AIAOnLfRAczx6wy1vg=; b=YzaTOuzsHEXm13iqqPVvgx1d/oWzC/4plqLS2UXpQ27LeMb9t+tGlfgBklJLWqRCe+UWB9ch8A22h91vZYcqE3H1dDHZ1Es6amhUPlprr4c0uCyA5ZO8w+B7fyb2kUN/LqpfWLMR2tmECrhKkbCRa9wIKAtGJHzaLW8r7hZlVIs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1641282737; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=oTqBzxX1GmqRHMsD7QTspPr4+AIAOnLfRAczx6wy1vg=; b=ReNg5IQhNyz1Q7lNUydCWu5IK9j+9Va3Qbwix6Z2IwoMGcvJsQot0+aJgGpVQi2n hp9/CpoThk8BCxL0/VG8Ltz3/O+pYsurxfhPwXTcA0TUgPKxyLE5bssgynQtjS9XoQh dFcjr/1mgxkaI2VNYRufO6XArgQSxc+r3i5AIQbA= Received: from localhost (p54ad4c55.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.76.85]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1641282734272822.0361116499556; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 23:52:14 -0800 (PST) References: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus To: Jelle Licht Subject: Re: bug#52979: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 08:50:10 +0100 In-reply-to: <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87zgocdjkl.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52979 Cc: 52979@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Jelle Licht writes: > We can disable this optimisation by setting ST_NLINK_TRICK at compile > time. That=E2=80=99s what I did, and it does let kpathsea traverse all the fonts. Unfortunately, in my tests it does not fix pdflatex. It does, however, fix xelatex. Debbugging output suggests that pdflatex encounters the font file cmr10.tfm, but for some unknown reason doesn=E2=80=99t seem to be satisfied= with it. --=20 Ricardo From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 04 04:47:01 2022 Received: (at 52979) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2022 09:47:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37028 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4gPF-0001Ny-Ah for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 04:47:01 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.188.51]:21107) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4gPC-0001Nm-NR for 52979@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 04:46:59 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1641289616; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=NlPFFGa1k1gxdmYpPEPO0QrnCUI2YhwAYZdyR9RfUWIQuqmUUXaersj0L446WJv4goEazg1J8sEzIZ7jhNjjGviPUQ3aYyu6RQ0KNW05IccASQIsnRuBiiYHsy0pzmci4m5UM4R46GLt5m3fRSgFjpB2/J/o4TnANfi03ri8ckA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1641289616; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=MZ317IDHkkURofvjaEAqBKSywSnl9Urt855++J9CaWo=; b=RXyWFl1gishEoUhVD3N/oxD5lmMgFyCG8D8sL5fqv+iiGMWKMja9zl6AnNpKi/KdqnRhoPTk7VS6ywXpLkT8oz3rqMn38HZkuAJGbs4saiGEt4gFP3OIrIDh1Y5FgAxEMRwGlLWCVOlACX/WxFWxx+yOWzDw4VBufC4zryA4zaw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1641289616; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=MZ317IDHkkURofvjaEAqBKSywSnl9Urt855++J9CaWo=; b=aEWWUSRbFsK3L5drA8nL9mlFBAeaUdoER892XJQ+a+HAOsib/dxmz3D+OF39ga51 FGod/Y4OpArstGI1hfETXGwp9VuS+5lUrcO1jjxUfs13NzcA+Xu6dwdvcEIPtI5yKbl tQs5pua04UQjHHzo5CGdk/Ux7GTPnq+pYRXMWULs= Received: from localhost (p54ad4c55.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.76.85]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1641289614583384.26690192837304; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 01:46:54 -0800 (PST) References: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> <87zgocdjkl.fsf@elephly.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus To: Jelle Licht Subject: Re: bug#52979: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 10:19:29 +0100 In-reply-to: <87zgocdjkl.fsf@elephly.net> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87v8yzestw.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52979 Cc: 52979@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Jelle Licht writes: > >> We can disable this optimisation by setting ST_NLINK_TRICK at compile >> time. > > That=E2=80=99s what I did, and it does let kpathsea traverse all the font= s. > Unfortunately, in my tests it does not fix pdflatex. It does, however, > fix xelatex. > > Debbugging output suggests that pdflatex encounters the font file > cmr10.tfm, but for some unknown reason doesn=E2=80=99t seem to be satisfi= ed with > it. It finds cmr10.tfm and then later proceeds to search (with =E2=80=9Cmust_exist=3D1=E2=80=9D) for bitmap fonts such as dpi656/cmr10.pk = (cmr10.656pk) or dpi659/cmr10.pk (cmr10.659pk). That=E2=80=99s how it fails: !pdfTeX error: pdflatex (file cmr10): Font cmr10 at 657 not found 657 is the resolution. The other sizes are due to KPSE_BITMAP_TOLERANCE; it will also search for alternatives whose resolution is close enough to the intended size. I wonder why it bothers with bitmap fonts at all. And why it looks for this really odd resolution. We have texmf-dist/fonts/pk/ljfour/public/cm/dpi600/cmr10.pk. Why doesn=E2=80=99t = it look for a font with resolution 600? The resolution 657 must have been computed somewhere. --=20 Ricardo From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 04 05:40:11 2022 Received: (at 52979) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2022 10:40:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37065 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4hEg-0002i7-Td for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 05:40:11 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.188.51]:21195) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4hEc-0002hs-4j for 52979@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 05:40:10 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1641292801; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=bndSZap3uc/2wrzqZeyEh8Ho/HJeO1iA6gW519jY9VGVeBg/4dDrw39vtn85Jhles7+zUMHG1LQGrM5tp+28LqVVRIavFyTFbsRzkQ+/ZdCy+aGio9Nd99py5E7ibgVoO9KJmD9f78Ricze7bDksq0MWxDQACWc9prpl9IQCivw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1641292801; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=26UjmA9qLacLKPeBmABb4YTDxkCcVj9JIN4tN358w/w=; b=FDjFnR8vUwcGZI8rdBdxLOxdZR3kpPEu3A6uVxmR39zgEcWto/sSiXMOXok0z+loUSE7p5/KRxWbV5AgDzic5vVIW8MU3M2/+yRCXZtaLGaoqq5v+GVBIiWI9xnvmJBsL8uCIY01MfT/iZjiqCCBoXNDAwzn42amFDALLkuq5N8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1641292801; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=26UjmA9qLacLKPeBmABb4YTDxkCcVj9JIN4tN358w/w=; b=Q7V+u07N30MDZ42b3qJYNKszxzLCwaG/WH/GY3VidcJyca9PAaFdsEC5v1QxTfne 5GbPjlVGIY0w3eziTwalVvnHJxPK5wRWtaFNWhD++6rvh4pN6kwgG78scPlu/c1Gwmo nK2//cwzl+jeHCLjRgusgI+mAS42qk54VjX9+iy4= Received: from localhost (p54ad4c55.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.76.85]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 164129279848392.83691208288099; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 02:39:58 -0800 (PST) References: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> <87zgocdjkl.fsf@elephly.net> <87v8yzestw.fsf@elephly.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus To: Jelle Licht Subject: Re: bug#52979: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 10:58:43 +0100 In-reply-to: <87v8yzestw.fsf@elephly.net> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87r19neqdh.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52979 Cc: 52979@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > >> Jelle Licht writes: >> >>> We can disable this optimisation by setting ST_NLINK_TRICK at compile >>> time. >> >> That=E2=80=99s what I did, and it does let kpathsea traverse all the fon= ts. >> Unfortunately, in my tests it does not fix pdflatex. It does, however, >> fix xelatex. >> >> Debbugging output suggests that pdflatex encounters the font file >> cmr10.tfm, but for some unknown reason doesn=E2=80=99t seem to be satisf= ied with >> it. > > It finds cmr10.tfm and then later proceeds to search (with > =E2=80=9Cmust_exist=3D1=E2=80=9D) for bitmap fonts such as dpi656/cmr10.p= k (cmr10.656pk) > or dpi659/cmr10.pk (cmr10.659pk). > > That=E2=80=99s how it fails: > > !pdfTeX error: pdflatex (file cmr10): Font cmr10 at 657 not found > > 657 is the resolution. The other sizes are due to > KPSE_BITMAP_TOLERANCE; it will also search for alternatives whose > resolution is close enough to the intended size. > > I wonder why it bothers with bitmap fonts at all. Still wondering, but=E2=80=A6. > And why it looks for > this really odd resolution. We have > texmf-dist/fonts/pk/ljfour/public/cm/dpi600/cmr10.pk. Why doesn=E2=80=99= t it > look for a font with resolution 600? The resolution 657 must have been > computed somewhere. =E2=80=A6this mystery is solved. This document works: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \begin{document} Hello frienderino's \end{document} --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- But this one doesn=E2=80=99t: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- \documentclass[11pt]{article} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \begin{document} Hello frienderino's \end{document} --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- A font size of 10pt is also fine. When a font size of 11pt is requested, however, it probably computes a different DPI value and tries to find matching bitmap fonts of that size. It should just generate new fonts then, but I guess mktexpk and all those tools need to patch their invocations of sed and awk. So, two things to do here: 1) patch mktexpk, mktexnam, mktexnam.opt, share/texmf-dist/web2c/mktexupd, et al to find =E2=80=9Csed=E2=80=9D and = =E2=80=9Cawk=E2=80=9D. 2) figure out why pdflatex tries to use bitmap fonts at all when other files exist. --=20 Ricardo From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 04 09:29:16 2022 Received: (at 52979-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2022 14:29:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37171 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4koN-0002bm-Pw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:29:15 -0500 Received: from sender4-of-o51.zoho.com ([136.143.188.51]:21130) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1n4koI-0002bX-AE for 52979-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:29:14 -0500 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1641306548; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=Pr+kOJPWGXy2rqJvZkkVcuF32tyArNYymoGeSyROMAUH//vQxolg/8/iwqy7LkxMP+A02RZdHvBgHXIs1AnGKPH+6f2a/uKYAa9HMMVHrtNOhCjPtlidVWJw+T8AalAqFwdAR+2qnautzsHJKuJYEBXRU9adBiScpf1SuRzcdN4= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1641306548; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=WACNaRm8QOBiiKYQaaSVlWUIxwN1YgXmCKZ6wOmV7Ew=; b=ZpCuZpINafHW5VUVxxuqwDV90K0Ym5l7Ki9RcRm3IiWkQjIEWvGpm7VnxrKm7r5ny0/HARCJu+wM4p7bvljYO7ebC9l+ffD3twmPh5VwhrZRiyB9lnj/U4N4YCWlkrE/zY8EoTniUkzjtdkgq8jsmlBcWs/KkpQaSL6hPgs3elU= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=elephly.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rekado@elephly.net; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1641306548; s=zoho; d=elephly.net; i=rekado@elephly.net; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=WACNaRm8QOBiiKYQaaSVlWUIxwN1YgXmCKZ6wOmV7Ew=; b=T2UoCPQboFm4sYcQ4vUBnZmRAD3VYUtHRFLdauxINDbnRQ4MhxyINZOL7qzCpVfe Mf7nt12TElCuefy/zPgpzj6J44xwhdKJQZZeZRTRqGI2Qs40OMNmMem+VrkzyPanjjM X7pWuWxIPbA/KZj8+tlc1bseUbieyok2/MTaj9m0= Received: from localhost (p54ad4c55.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.173.76.85]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1641306544718967.7076241535883; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 06:29:04 -0800 (PST) References: <86k0fg3i9y.fsf@fsfe.org> <86ee5o3g1t.fsf@fsfe.org> <87zgocdjkl.fsf@elephly.net> <87v8yzestw.fsf@elephly.net> <87r19neqdh.fsf@elephly.net> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Ricardo Wurmus To: Jelle Licht Subject: Re: bug#52979: Modular texlive has problems finding fonts Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:28:17 +0100 In-reply-to: <87r19neqdh.fsf@elephly.net> X-URL: https://elephly.net X-PGP-Key: https://elephly.net/rekado.pubkey X-PGP-Fingerprint: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC Message-ID: <87mtkbefrm.fsf@elephly.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 52979-done Cc: 52979-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) Ricardo Wurmus writes: > So, two things to do here: > > 1) patch mktexpk, mktexnam, mktexnam.opt, > share/texmf-dist/web2c/mktexupd, et al to find =E2=80=9Csed=E2=80=9D and = =E2=80=9Cawk=E2=80=9D. Done. > 2) figure out why pdflatex tries to use bitmap fonts at all when other > files exist. Not done, but the problem has gone away after fixing the former problem. This now works on wip-texlive, which I just pushed. --=20 Ricardo From unknown Fri Jun 20 18:15:42 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 12:24:07 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator