[tex-live] TeX and recent ghostscript changes

Reinhard Kotucha reinhard.kotucha at web.de
Fri Sep 22 01:25:26 CEST 2017

On 2017-09-21 at 09:08:59 +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:

 > > It's a matter of fact that it's difficult to merge two subsets of a
 > > particular font.
 > This is not what we (the lilypond team) are after.  We need proper
 > merging of non-subsetted fonts.

Hi Werner,
I must admit that I had not lilypond in mind in the first place.  But
if the fonts are not subsetted and you are willing/able to add a
program to the lilypond distribution which can [de]compress PDF files
(qpdf, pdftk), I'm sure that you can write a script which solves the
problem without much effort.  I'm quite optimistic because I already
repaired a broken PDF file created by InDesign manually.

I can tell you more tomorrow if you are interested.

 > > They claim that two fonts with the same name are not necessarily
 > > identical.  [...]
 > This refers mainly to bad names for subsetted fonts as produced by
 > OpenOffice, IIRC.  In other words, you are barking the wrong tree.

What's the problem? If OpenOffice does not comply with the PDF specs,
the worst thing Ghostscript can do is to provide a workaround.

 > > But all these three variants have the same /FontName and the same
 > > /UniqueID.
 > The concept of /UniqueID was abandoned many years ago already by
 > Adobe, for good reasons.

What are these "good reasons"?


Reinhard Kotucha                            Phone: +49-511-3373112
Marschnerstr. 25
D-30167 Hannover                    mailto:reinhard.kotucha at web.de

More information about the tex-live mailing list