On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 14:15:57 -0700
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 4/15/19 12:48 PM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> > What are the alternatives to pdftk?
> > I need to rotate a pdf file.
>
> I use pdfshuffler.
+1
d
> ___
>
On 4/15/19 12:48 PM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
What are the alternatives to pdftk?
I need to rotate a pdf file.
I use pdfshuffler.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
.
pdf-stapler is very close to being a proper replacement.
https://github.com/hellerbarde/stapler
It does all the concatenating and rotating and retaining-of-data stuff
that pdftk does.
It doesn't have a very robust system for dealing with bookmarks and
other metadata.
I coasted with pdf-st
2019-04-15 21:48 GMT+02:00, Patrick Dupre :
> Hello,
>
> What are the alternatives to pdftk?
> I need to rotate a pdf file.
There's pdf90 (part of texlive-pdfjam) which, according to its man
page, "rotates the pages of files in the Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) th
qpdf and ImageMagick are among the suggestions on this page:
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/394065/command-line-how-do-you-rotate-a-pdf-file-90-degrees
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 3:48 PM Patrick Dupre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What are the alternatives to pdftk?
> I need to rotat
Hello,
What are the alternatives to pdftk?
I need to rotate a pdf file.
Thank.
===
Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com
Laboratoire interdisciplinaire Carnot de Bourgogne
9 Avenue Alain
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Ranjan Maitra
wrote:
> Try again!
>
> I just realized that the changes requested by BZ actually damaged the
> package. Try downloading and seeing if this works now.
Thanks again, Ranjan. I have just done that, and now the command
pdf-stapler --help
works just fi
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:14:59 -0500 Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> On 09/02/2015 01:23 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > Well, originally, I had posted the github source, but this had to be
> > changed to meet Fedora's guidelines.
>
> Pointing to a github release URL is valid. Whoever told you to change
On 09/02/2015 01:23 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
Well, originally, I had posted the github source, but this had to be changed to
meet Fedora's guidelines.
Pointing to a github release URL is valid. Whoever told you to change "due to the
guidelines" is wrong.
Please post the review bugzilla URL.
Try again!
I just realized that the changes requested by BZ actually damaged the package.
Try downloading and seeing if this works now.
Best wishes,
Ranjan
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 19:20:40 +0100 Paul Smith wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I have just installed Ranjan's rpm on F22, but getting the followi
pdfstapler -help
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 19:20:40 +0100 Paul Smith wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I have just installed Ranjan's rpm on F22, but getting the following error:
>
> -
> $ pdf-stapler --help
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/bin/pdf-stapler", line 5, in
>
> Github exports archives for any given commit, tag, or branch head. If
> upstream has tagged releases on GitHub, you can use that as a source. I
> personally prefer to do this; it seems odd to involve a third party, and I
> can reliably associate the version in the package with the source rep
Dear All,
I have just installed Ranjan's rpm on F22, but getting the following error:
-
$ pdf-stapler --help
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/pdf-stapler", line 5, in
from pkg_resources import load_entry_point
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-package
at 3:26 PM, Ranjan Maitra
> >> wrote:
> >>> Btw, I have put my rpm for pdf-stapler here, in case it helps anyone:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/pdf-stapler-0.3.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
> >>>
> >>> I personally h
On Sep 2, 2015 12:51 PM, "Ranjan Maitra"
wrote:
>
> Paul,
>
> I put in a review request to BZ, and it is a bit stuck there. The BZ
people are not to be blamed for this however.
>
> The issue is a license file which exists on the git site, but not in the
tar file on the pypi site. I have written se
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Ranjan Maitra
wrote:
>
> I put in a review request to BZ, and it is a bit stuck there. The BZ people
> are not to be blamed for this however.
>
> The issue is a license file which exists on the git site, but not in the tar
> file on the pypi site. I have written s
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Ranjan Maitra
wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
>
pdf-stapler or pdfshuffler are fine tools if you just want to collate
PDFs, but pdftk did a lot more. I've been using it for years to merge
data into pre-built template PDFs.
re, in case it helps anyone:
>>>
>>> http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/pdf-stapler-0.3.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
>>>
>>> I personally have found pdf-stapler to be a very good, perhaps better,
>>> commandline replacement for pdftk (for my purposes, but
> >
> > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/pdf-stapler-0.3.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
> >
> > I personally have found pdf-stapler to be a very good, perhaps better,
> > commandline replacement for pdftk (for my purposes, but of course, your
> > needs may vary).
>
> Thank
quot;
> > To: "Community support for Fedora users"
> > Subject: Re: pdftk
> >
> > You need PyPdf installed.
> >
> > On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 19:17:03 +0200 Patrick Dupre wrote:
> >
> > > pdf-stapler --help
> > > Traceback (most recen
> commandline replacement for pdftk (for my purposes, but of course, your needs
> may vary).
Thanks, Ranjan. Are you planning to insert your pdf-stapler rpm into
some public repository?
Paul
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscr
mber 02, 2015 at 7:20 PM
> From: "Ranjan Maitra"
> To: "Community support for Fedora users"
> Subject: Re: pdftk
>
> You need PyPdf installed.
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 19:17:03 +0200 Patrick Dupre wrote:
>
> > pdf-stapler --help
> > Traceba
3)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44
> 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France
> ===
>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 at 6:57 PM
> >
|
> Tel. (33)-(0)3 28 23 76 12 | | Fax: 03 28 65 82 44
> 189A, avenue Maurice Schumann | | 59140 Dunkerque, France
> ===
>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 02,
| | 59140 Dunkerque, France
===
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 at 6:57 PM
> From: "Ranjan Maitra"
> To: "Community support for Fedora users"
> Subject: Re: pdftk
>
> Try it now, with 1 instead of 2 (you know where).
>
&
| | 59140 Dunkerque, France
> ===
>
>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 at 4:26 PM
> > From: "Ranjan Maitra"
> > To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Subject: Re: pdftk
>
: "Ranjan Maitra"
> To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: pdftk
>
> Btw, I have put my rpm for pdf-stapler here, in case it helps anyone:
>
> http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/pdf-stapler-0.3.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
>
> I personally have found pdf-stapler
Btw, I have put my rpm for pdf-stapler here, in case it helps anyone:
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~maitra/pdf-stapler-0.3.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
I personally have found pdf-stapler to be a very good, perhaps better,
commandline replacement for pdftk (for my purposes, but of course, your needs
On 1 September 2015 at 17:09, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> Unfortunately, pdfshuffler does not have the same capabilities than pdftk.
> It has a graphics interface.
> There is one command easy with pdftk:
> pdftk file.pdf cat 3-4 output file2.pdf
Something like this should give
On 01.09.2015, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> There is one command easy with pdftk:
> pdftk file.pdf cat 3-4 output file2.pdf
> that I cannot have with pdfshuffler.
This can easily be done with pdfshuffler. Just load the .pdf, mark
page 3 and 4, right click and choose "export selection&qu
Unfortunately, pdfshuffler does not have the same capabilities than pdftk.
It has a graphics interface.
There is one command easy with pdftk:
pdftk file.pdf cat 3-4 output file2.pdf
that I cannot have with pdfshuffler.
pdftk, is a well established and solid tool while pdfshuffer fails eventually
On 01.09.2015, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> What is the future of pdftk as part of fedora?
> It did not find any good alternative.
dnf install poppler-utils pdfshuffler
These tools together can replace most pdftk functionality.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234210
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:20:54 +0100 Ian Malone wrote:
> On 1 September 2015 at 12:54, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > What is the future of pdftk as part of fedora?
> > It did not find any good alternati
On 1 September 2015 at 12:54, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What is the future of pdftk as part of fedora?
> It did not find any good alternative.
>
> Thank.
Not sure, maybe a question for the developers list. itext (I'm
assuming it's the same itext
Hello,
What is the future of pdftk as part of fedora?
It did not find any good alternative.
Thank.
===
Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com
Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie de l'Atmos
On 13.05.2015, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> You can only wait for a few more weeks while the alternative
> pdf-stapler is approved.
Or you can use poppler-utils, and you could also install F19 (the latest Fedora
with a working
pdftk) on an USB stick. That's what I did to tailor my docu
> It looks like that the last version of pdftk is pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.x86_64
> for fc21!
> it provides me an error:
> pdftk: error while loading shared libraries:
> /usr/lib64/gcj/itext/itext-2.1.7.jar.so: cannot open shared object file: No
> such file or directory
>
> W
Hello,
It looks like that the last version of pdftk is pdftk-1.44-11.fc19.x86_64
for fc21!
it provides me an error:
pdftk: error while loading shared libraries:
/usr/lib64/gcj/itext/itext-2.1.7.jar.so: cannot open shared object file: No
such file or directory
Where can I get:
itext-2.1.7
On 13.12.2014 14:10, Heinz Diehl wrote:
...
> I depend a lot on pdf merging functionality, I chose the shortest and
> easiest way if all fails. At work, I'm bound to Windows anyway..
>
http://cygwin.com
Let go Luke
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change su
e alternative to pdftk's functions.
>
> The author of this package states:
> "It’s the first public and testable version, don’t expect it to be
> stable and production ready".
>
> So while this may be a beginning, it's most probably not "production
> ready
On 13.12.2014, poma wrote:
> https://www.winehq.org
> Use the Force, Luke ...
I do not want to run any Windows software on a Linux machine. Since
I depend a lot on pdf merging functionality, I chose the shortest and
easiest way if all fails. At work, I'm bound to Windows anyway..
--
users mail
On 13.12.2014 10:41, Heinz Diehl wrote:
...
> (alternatively, I'll use a Windows 7 machine at work to do the pdf merging).
>
https://www.winehq.org
Use the Force, Luke ...
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedorapro
’s the first public and testable version, don’t expect it to be
stable and production ready".
So while this may be a beginning, it's most probably not "production
ready".
Here's another program which has quite the functionality pdftk has. I
just downloaded the source and
Btw, I came across this:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfsam/?source=typ_t4_highlighted
Not clear if this satisfies OSS requirements of Fedora but it would be at least
a worthwhile alternative to pdftk's functions.
Best wishes,
Ranjan
___
01656.html
> >
> > Which is a pity, because I used to like pdftk and have been missing it
> > since it was dropped. Didn't know about mcpdu which Raman Gupta
> > mentioned and will check it out. Would be cool if ITEXT could be
> > brought back (think it does all
>
> Regrettably it's a slightly modified AGPL and, though IANAL, it looks
> like the problematic additional restriction is still there:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2011-June/001656.html
>
> Which is a pity, because I used to like pdftk and have been mi
:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:55:10 -0500 Matthew Miller
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>>>>>>>> It would be good if some
500 Matthew Miller
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>>>>>>>> It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>
if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
missed. Given that Fedora isn't going to continue, I understand it
is a bit useless to make the comment here. But hopefully senior folk
in Fedora can give a push for pdftk
;>>> It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
> >>>>> Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
> >>>>> missed. Given that Fedora isn't going to continue, I understand it
> >>>>> is a
On 12/10/2014 04:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:55:10 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and
it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
missed. Given that Fedora isn't going to continue, I understand it
is a bit useless to make the comment here. But hopefully senior folk
in Fedora can give a push for pdftk to be "somewhere" within the
Linux world that Fedora users can pi
> I'm running pclos-kde, and I had not heard of pdftk, but my system has it
> available in
> the repos, so I looked up the description. It seems to be a very useful,
> competent tool
> with a lot of features, so I really don't understand why Fedora would drop
> it
On 12/10/2014 07:07 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:55:10 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 18:55:10 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > > > It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
> > > > Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and wi
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 05:51:59PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > > It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
> > > Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
> > > missed. Given that Fedora isn't going to continue
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:04:12 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:28:57AM -0800, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
> > It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
> > Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
> > miss
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:28:57AM -0800, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
> It would be good if someone who could pick it up w/o the issues that
> Fedora had would do it -- pdftk was a good package and will be
> missed. Given that Fedora isn't going to continue, I understand it
> is a bi
On 12/10/2014 04:23 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Ranjan Maitra
> wrote:
>> What is the story with pdftk?
>
> As pointed out by others, it used a really old Java stack that is no
> longer supported.
>
> There is a more modern replac
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Ranjan Maitra
wrote:
> What is the story with pdftk?
As pointed out by others, it used a really old Java stack that is no
longer supported.
There is a more modern replacement called mcpdf. It supports the same
command line syntax but has much more mod
On 12/09/2014 09:48 PM, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014 21:01:46 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:37:08PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
What is the story with pdftk?
$ sudo yum list pdftk
.
Installed Packages
pdftk.x86_641.44-11.fc19
On Tue, 9 Dec 2014 21:01:46 -0500 Matthew Miller
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:37:08PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> > What is the story with pdftk?
> > $ sudo yum list pdftk
> > .
> > Installed Packages
> > pdftk.x86_64
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 07:37:08PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> What is the story with pdftk?
> $ sudo yum list pdftk
> .
> Installed Packages
> pdftk.x86_641.44-11.fc19
> @fedora
> Is it orphaned? That would be a bummer!
What is the story with pdftk?
$ sudo yum list pdftk
.
Installed Packages
pdftk.x86_641.44-11.fc19 @fedora
Is it orphaned? That would be a bummer! I depend on it a lot.
Ranjan
--
Important Notice: This mailbox is ignored: e-mails are set to
> You've been affected by the recent selinux-policy-targeted bug, which
> broke installation of a few updates as long as you didn't apply the
> fix.
>
> Try reinstalling the java-1.7.0-openjdk-headless package and
> following these instructions:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=105
when I last used this so some update must have created
> > > some problem somewhere.
> > >
> > > $ pdftk --nup 2x2 random.pdf
> > > /usr/bin/build-classpath: Failed to set JAVACMD
> > > Can't get ouput from /usr/bin/build-classpath ite
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 15:40:33 -0500 Deepak Bhole
wrote:
> * Ranjan Maitra [2014-01-28 15:02]:
> > I have been having this error since this morning: I has no problems
> > last Thursday when I last used this so some update must have created
> > some problem somewhere.
>
* Ranjan Maitra [2014-01-28 15:02]:
> I have been having this error since this morning: I has no problems
> last Thursday when I last used this so some update must have created
> some problem somewhere.
>
> $ pdftk --nup 2x2 random.pdf
> /usr/bin/build-classpath: Failed to s
I have been having this error since this morning: I has no problems
last Thursday when I last used this so some update must have created
some problem somewhere.
$ pdftk --nup 2x2 random.pdf
/usr/bin/build-classpath: Failed to set JAVACMD
Can't get ouput from /usr/bin/build-classpath itext b
69 matches
Mail list logo
