At 22:30 19/09/2017 +0200, Knut Petersen wrote:
What happens if you include several "final" pdfs in a *TeX document?
If you include several pdfs generated as described above in a
*TeX-generated pdf, all fonts from the lilypond pdfs are included.
Probably all are different. If you feed the *TeX-pdf to ghostscript,
ghostscript sees different fonts (although all are constructed from
emmentaler glyphs). ghostscript never was able to merge those fonts, and
it probably never will be able.
Quite so. The use of glyphshow means that a font must be created. Each such
font is effectively unique in its layout. It is technically possible to
reconstruct a small number of fonts which include all the potential glyphs,
and remap all the character codes in all the PDF files so that they use
these fonts. In practice this is unfeasible.
We include thousands of lilypond-pdfs in a TeX document
OK so Lilypond produces its PostScript in an entirely different (but better
from a PostScript programmers point of view) way. This explains why I
wasn't able to understand David's point, my prior exposure to Lilypond
output didn't look like that.
I do have a notion of a way to solve this, using Ghostscript but without
exploiting the old bug, but before I discuss it I'd like to test it
further, with real Lilypond data. Just in case it turns out not to work
with your files.
If someone can create a couple of PostScript files, ideally genuine
examples of the files you would use for your manual, created as you would
create them for the manual (ie with the bigpdf switch) then I can
experiment a bit. I don't need any PDF files, just the PostScript you would
send to Ghostscript to create a PDF file.
Oh, and I'd need whatever fonts you are using as well. I'm surprised you
find it necessary to have different fonts for different point sizes though.
Ken
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
