[tex-k] dvipdfm[x] problem with dashed horizontal lines

Bob Tennent rdtennent at gmail.com
Mon May 31 21:14:20 CEST 2021

I've tried dvipdfmx -v on fontcharts of several of the musixtex fonts and
virtually *every* glyph has "Intolerable difference in glyph width".  There
are some 80 musixtex fonts so
"fixing" the fonts would involve adjusting the widths of some 20K glyphs.
Do you have any other suggestions? Would a dvipdfmx option to revert to the
"wrong" way of doing it be possible?

Bob T.

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 12:12 PM Shunsaku Hirata <
shunsaku.hirata74 at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Thank you for this. The type1 musixtex fonts were developed
> > by Takanori Uchiyama in about 2003 and there have been no
> > issues and no changes since then. On the other hand, the
> > current issue with dvipdfmx seems to have started recently
> > and did not arise with earler releases; has something
> > changed in the way dvipdfmx deals with type1 fonts? I also
> Yes, I recently made a change.
> Very old versions and recent versions should show the same
> behavior. For many years dvipdfmx had been wrongly using
> glyph widths taken from TFMs which can be different from the
> actual widths recorded in Type1 fonts.
> > note that no other dviware seems to have a similar issue.
> Probably, this is due to the difference in the way how glyphs
> are placed: dvipdfmx basically uses relative displacements
> for placing glyphs in the output PDF while (probably) others
> put each glyphs with absolute positions explicitly specified.
> In the latter case inconsistent glyph widths don't affect the
> rendered result.
> Thanks,
> Shunsaku Hirata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://tug.org/pipermail/tex-k/attachments/20210531/b184d9ab/attachment.html>

More information about the tex-k mailing list.