[tex-live] Re: [tex-implementors] LM as the default outline font?

Hans Hagen pragma at wxs.nl
Thu Mar 24 10:14:33 CET 2005

Staszek Wawrykiewicz wrote:

> 3. ttcmex.map vs. cm-lm.map
> cmex7 CMEX10 <fmex10.pfb
> cmex8 CMEX10 <fmex10.pfb
> cmex9 CMEX10 <fmex10.pfb
> those lines should be removed from cm-lm.map, as such fonts doesn't
> exist in any distribution in cm* concerning map files (extra *.pfb fonts 
> belong now to the different package).
> Ps. replacing CS, PL and VN would be the next step (more easy).

indeed, once we have convinced the polish and czech that they should use the 
accented variants in lmr (consistency etc, as discussed at eurotex)

one thing to keep in mind is that for pdftex you need lines like

   cmr10 CMR10 <cmr10.pfb

while dvips wants:

   cmr10 "the full latin modern name" <cmr10.pfb

if pdftex map files have the full name, inclusion of files that already have cmr 
fonts embedded will be very inefficient (i had examples of hundreds of addition 
cmr subsetted fonts) because pdftex compares the internal names.

future versions of pdftex will probably be able to handle constructs like:

   cmr10 foo,bar <cmr10.pfb

so that we can add both the old and new internal name.

[context already made the switch to latin modern, and it is a bit of a struggle 
for users to get things integrated in their tree; i post lmr archives in the tds 
format for that purpose; as long as mall bugfixes take place in lmr, we need to 
make sure that tetex/fptex/gwtex use the latest versions; this can be a problem 
with official linux distributions since they are sometimes quite frozen to a 
stable version of tetex; so .. a clear version indication is important)


                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
      tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                                              | www.pragma-pod.nl

More information about the tex-live mailing list