----- Forwarded message from Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----
> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 12:15:56 +0100 > From: Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14-vl-r16324 (2007-02-28) > X-Mailer-Info: http://www.vinc17.org/mutt/ > To: Oleksandr Moskalenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Bug#355757: (no subject) > > On 2007-03-01 11:41:37 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > > I'm not sure it is contradictory, but the discussion in bug 365506 > > gave a wrong solution. The bug reporter said that the PS file was > > for A4 paper size, but was converted to Letter paper size (but this > > is strange since ps2pdf seems to run fine here). What I suggest > > would be consistent with what is required in this bug: keep the > > original paper size. For instance, what if the user had an A3 or > > US-Legal (i.e. larger than A4) PS file and wanted to convert it to > > PDF? Using /etc/papersize here would clearly be a bad choice. > > Well, when I'm saying that ps2pdf seems to run fine, in fact this > depends on the file. When /etc/papersize is empty (to provide no > defaults -- i.e. letter is the default), ps2pdf converts some A4 > files into A4 (that's OK), but some other ones (landscape ones?) > into letter, though both contain: > > %%DocumentPaperSizes: a4 > > But perhaps there is some detection based on the bounding box which > doesn't work reliably. The landscape file has: > > %%BoundingBox: 0 0 595 842 > > while the portrait file has: > > %%BoundingBox: 0 0 596 842 I'd really like to hear what Masayuki, Torsten and Jonas think about this because it is getting into the realm of a technical decision that maintainers should agree on before we start sending them more patches for ps2pdf and pdf2ps. Regards, Alex. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
