[tex-live] libertine wrongly packaged
bnb at ams.org
Sat Dec 31 16:39:34 CET 2011
On Sat, 31 Dec 2011, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Am Fri, 30 Dec 2011 14:41:36 -0800 schrieb Karl Berry:
> it is the question if such fonts should actually be in a texmf tree.
> I strongly disagree with your implication. When a document uses system
> font lookups, it is unportable by definition. I don't think that is a
> good scenario to encourage.
? You mean TeX systems should only encourage the creation of
documents which uses only (free) fonts which are distribuated by a
no, but if non-free (or otherwise "variable")
fonts are used, they then need to be shipped
around with the document, e.g. embedded in a
otherwise, they are by definition unportable,
as karl says.
if you've ever sent a pdf file without embedded
fonts to a printer and been surprised that what
you got back wasn't what you expected, you'd
know exactly what is meant here. (and by
"printer", i don't mean your local laser printer,
but a commercial printing house where plates
made from pdf files are put on a press for
Sorry but already with pdflatex quite a lot documents use
commercial/non-free fonts e.g. corporate fonts. And the majority of
xetex/luatex/context documents use system fonts. You only need to
look at the documentation of fontspec or at all examples sent to the
mailing lists/usenet groups and forums.
doesn't change the picture with respect to printers.
Beside this: As far as I know with TeXLive xetex doesn't find otf
fonts in the texmf-trees with the default configuration. It can only
use otf fonts of the system. So you must use system font lookups ...
sorry to be snarky, but publishing is an
expensive business, and reliability is
necessary to avoid redoing a job that
should have gone right the first time.
missing fonts is not the printer's fault,
so the originator has to foot the bill.
More information about the tex-live