> I don't doubt the superiority of LaTex/Framemaker in > conjunction with Distiller in producing (the pdf > versions of) nicely typeset books and brochures. But > how good is a tool if it produces a product that its > intended users can NOT read? This is what prompted >
You seem to have missed the following reply by richard.... ============= Quote =================== This is not a PDF problem, it is a freetype font problem which was introduced with freetype 2.3.6 in b93 and should be fixed in b97. http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6723656 http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6712820 -- richard ==================================== This is a freetype problem, and such problems can impact anything. Nevada builds are anything but "lightly tested" developer snapshots. They didn't even introduce the problem - freetype folks did! On my system (nv84) OpenOffice looked so crap (thick ugly fonts) that I avoided using it until I compiled and replaced freetype. Secondly, PDF & Latex/docbook/SGML are as "free" and "open source" as you can get. PDF is open spec & anyone can create a viewer. It's like using Gimp to produce an art instead of GNOME Paint. Just like Gimp shouldn't be blamed if someone's image viewer is broken and they can't see an image, we shouldn't blame the tools that generated the PDF. The PDFs render fine in the following viewers I have on this nv84 system: * xpdf (3.02) * Acrobat Reader 8.0 (running via wine) * Foxit Reader 2.3 (running on wine) * GhostScript Thirdly, most (all?) the docs can be created independently by community. Infact you can start creating one yourself rather than wait/depend on Sun or anybody else. Isn't that what open source all about ? - Akhilesh This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
