OK, what happens if you do ps2pdf testfont.ps and view the resulting PDF file?
If the PS file looks OK, then I would definitely suspect your Ghostscript (which is the program doing the job in ps2pdf). Do you get the same problem both when viewing the PDF on screen and when you print it on paper? Could it even be your PDF viewer (Acroread?)?
Anyway, updmap is definitely not an issue, since the font map file is specified explicitly by lilypond when it calls dvips. In other words, there's no idea to use updmap.
/Mats
Ferenc Wagner wrote:
Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Did you build the ec-fonts-mftraced yourself? I would guess so, since you have problems both with the feta fonts in LilyPond and the ec-font used for the title.
You guessed wrong. ec-fonts-mftraced is from the Lilypond download site.
If you want to verify that a certain font file, say ecrm10.pfa, looks OK, try the following steps: Run: text testfont ... Name of the font to test = ecrm10 Now type a test command (\help for help):) *\table\bye
Run: dvips -u+ec-mftrace testfont (make sure that the printouts include <ecrm10.pfa> )
Look at the resulting file testfont.ps
For the feta font, replace ecrm10 by feta20 and -u+ec-mftrace by -u+lilypond
It says <feta20.pfa> and the resulting PS looks perfect. Please consider that in the original report I mentioned the Postscript file being perfect (with vector fonts), it's only the PDF which exhibits the problem.
-- ============================================= Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe =============================================
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
