Christoph Bier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: finally the mail arrived...
> Frank Küster schrieb am 09.08.2005 16:09: > >> Christoph Bier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > >>>There were no problems with the manually installed teTeX 3.0 on my >>>laptop. All my fonts worked and I used the same $TEXMFHOME as on my >>>desktop. So I had a working installation of teTeX 3.0 that showed me >>>everything is right in $TEXMFHOME. The problem was that calling >>>updmap as root did not create >>>/home/chris/.texmf-var/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/ and its content and >>>that /var/lib/texmf/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map was not >>>correctly updated (even with all map files in $TEXMFMAIN)---and is >>>still not even after calling updmap as root. >> >> You mean, fonts that were in $TEXMFHOME with the map files in $TEXMFMAIN >> had no correct information? > > Yes. > [...] > You want to see a diff > from /var/lib/texmf/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map and > .texmf-var/fonts/map/pdftex/updmap/pdftex.map? It's 351K big ... Better than a diff would be if you looked at the first couple of differing lines: - Do they just appear in different order? - If they are really missing in the ~/.texmf-var variant, in which map file in /etc/texmf do they appear? for file in `find /etc/texmf/ -name "*.map"`; do grep -H <first_word_of_missing_line>; done and to which font do they correspond? Where are the tfm, pfb, map, etc. files for that font? Looking at the code of updmap, I cannot understand how the difference can arise: Either the map is found, then it is used, or it is not found, then you get an error, and updmap and therefore postinst fails. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer