Hi Vadim. ** Vadim Radionov [2010-10-11 19:31:50 +0400]:
> Hi, Vladimir, > > My question was not about kerning in this commercial font. It was > about 2 instances of xetex that gave 2 different result. And i asked > how i can figure out what's wrong with one of them (texlive 2010). Ok. you could check if this problem of engine or driver (xdvipdfmx) in following way: 1. Make pdf with xetex from TL2009: $ xetex test.tex Save pdf as, for example, test_2009.pdf 2. Make pdf with xetex from TL2010: $ xetex test.tex Save pdf as, for example, test_2010.pdf 3. Run xetex from TL2009 $ xetex -no-pdf test.tex this will give you test.xdv. Then run xdvipdfmx from TL2010 $ xdvipdfmx test.xdv Save pdf as test_xpdf2010.pdf 4. Run xetex from TL2010 (!) $ xdvipdfmx test.xdv and xdvipdfmx from TL2009 (!) Save pdf as test_xpdf2009.pdf Compare the resulted pdfs. In either case ensure that you have only _ONE_ OTF/TTF file, even if you think that that particular one (for example in $HOME/.fonts) will be accessed firstly than other, drop that idea. >>> also gives good kerning with xetex >> I don't understand here. Kerning is always matter of taste. >> ... >> what's wrong? > > You can check the second post in this thread. In test1.pdf (produced > with old version) kerning is OK. In test.pdf (produced from the same > source with newer xetex) it is obvoiusly wrong in 2 places. (Sorry for > papersize again.) Yes, now I have seen you files. But this is rather strange. You're saying that you use TL2009 and TL2010 but according to pdfinfo both your files produced by the same xdvipdfmx. I have TL2009 installed in parallel with TL2010. I use a sample file with Garamond Premier Pro fond (not I don't buy it, but for test it is enough for me :|) and ensure that binaries of either TL2009 or TL2010 are accessed first. TL2009 (new shell) export PATH=$TL2009_PATH:$PATH (here: TL2009_PATH=/usr/local/opt/texlive/bin/x86_64-linux) run $ xetex ex.tex $ pdfinfo ex.pdf $ xetex -no-pdf ex.tex $ xdvipdfmx test.xdv $ pdfinfo ex.pdf Creator: XeTeX output 2010.10.12:0106 Producer: xdvipdfmx (0.7.7) CreationDate: Tue Oct 12 01:06:15 2010 Tagged: no Pages: 1 Encrypted: no Page size: 595.28 x 841.89 pts (A4) File size: 4553 bytes Optimized: no PDF version: 1.4 TL2010 (current shell) always set as following export PATH=$TL2010_PATH:$PATH (here TL2010_PATH=/usr/local/opt/texlive/2010/bin/x86_64-linux) the same run sequence. Creator: XeTeX output 2010.10.12:0106 Producer: xdvipdfmx (0.7.8) CreationDate: Tue Oct 12 01:06:55 2010 Tagged: no Pages: 1 Encrypted: no Page size: 595.28 x 841.89 pts (A4) File size: 3669 bytes Optimized: no PDF version: 1.5 >> For me this is font problem not the engine. Also you could check that >> you have only one font-file (I mean either only TTF or OTF, if both this >> could be reason of descrepancy). About font desing and implementation I >> think Khaled could tell you more. > Yes, this is probably a font problem. Both xetexs find the same otf > font in ~/.fonts > But the result it different. > >> Please don't post problems with commercial fonts because it could be >> almost impossible to tracker down the source of the problem. > > Sorry for bothering you. I was asking not for solution to my problem > but for hints to solve it myself. As I already said I tried with Garamond Premier Pro, in both cases the same result, so this could the problem with that particular font. But before make that conclusion please check the previous steps. --- WBR, Vladimir Lomov -- You were s'posed to laugh! -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
