From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/74261 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Vladimir Lomov Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Dubious "checksum mismatch" message on log file Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 10:21:03 +0900 Message-ID: <20120202012103.GL13420@smoon> References: <20120201010904.GH13420@smoon> <20120201060009.GI13420@smoon> <20120201092131.GJ13420@smoon> <1nnjepw9rlajm.dlg@nililand.de> <4F294AC2.6040704@wxs.nl> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328145689 10213 80.91.229.3 (2 Feb 2012 01:21:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 01:21:29 +0000 (UTC) To: ntg-context@ntg.nl Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Thu Feb 02 02:21:28 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([195.12.62.10]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RslMc-0008VW-Rb for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 02:21:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06CC7CB29A; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:26 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id T9U1CoGF6vPl; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:25 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99844CB28F; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:22 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A75CB28F for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:20 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mupxtrYguh32 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:09 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from filter2-til.mf.surf.net (filter2-til.mf.surf.net [194.171.167.218]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BFACCB28E for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:09 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-bk0-f41.google.com (mail-bk0-f41.google.com [209.85.214.41]) by filter2-til.mf.surf.net (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id q121L7QT003711 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 02:21:08 +0100 Original-Received: by bkbzs2 with SMTP id zs2so2074270bkb.14 for ; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:21:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=P/KeehqYh6Cseph/i2eoNoi0tuLEtJM0A9wxz5Vq7o0=; b=eDFWGWR0FzmXy+JA5uaVyNElif4OXpIvKkTzwThL+UcQq7C4PfSAy2q7iCbYHDhHGF VTZfkrpobnDkmS0aVnQIHUOSLlELGSCFWGoS9TAp4A1qu2dL/vDSt3wN5ak48uAPaJOJ Xz1Ome2lPMpKnCiMy2wzn8elFqErvApJicNQ4= Original-Received: by 10.204.156.23 with SMTP id u23mr411262bkw.18.1328145667823; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:21:07 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from smoon ([141.105.33.55]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z15sm2034874bkd.7.2012.02.01.17.21.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:21:06 -0800 (PST) Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Lomov , ntg-context@ntg.nl Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F294AC2.6040704@wxs.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: @@RPTN) X-CanIt-Geo: ip=209.85.214.41; country=US; region=CA; city=Mountain View; postalcode=94043; latitude=37.4192; longitude=-122.0574; metrocode=807; areacode=650; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=37.4192,-122.0574&z=6 X-CanItPRO-Stream: uu:ntg-context@ntg.nl (inherits from uu:default, base:default) X-Canit-Stats-ID: 0bGsNl8Ju - 8ee08dac5d0c - 20120202 (trained as not-spam) X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 194.171.167.218 X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:74261 Archived-At: Hello, ** Hans Hagen [2012-02-01 15:22:58 +0100]: > On 1-2-2012 15:15, Ulrike Fischer wrote: > >Am Wed, 1 Feb 2012 10:54:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso: >>>It's not related to MKIV but to luatex. >>I think it is related to MKIV (or more precisely to the fontloader). >>It is a bit difficult to demonstrate it with context (how to you use >>luatex without mkiv there?) but latex (or plain) it is quite easy: >>The followings examples load pplr7t.vf. Both give the checksum >>mismatch message in the log if and only if the lua-fontloader >>luaotfload it also loaded: >>%LaTeX >>\documentclass{article} >>\usepackage{luaotfload} >>\begin{document} >>\font\test=pplr7t \test abc >>\end{document} >>%plain >>\input luaotfload.sty >>\font\test=pplr7t \test abc >>\bye >>So the code from luaotfload (which is based on the context >>fontloader code) changes a checksum (either in the vf or in the >>tfm-information) and so the check in the luatex engines fails. >>(Imho it is only a minor problem, vf-fonts are not much used with >>luatex). > Afaik nothing is done with a checksum. There is a checksum field in > the loaded tfm but I don't think one has to be passed to luatex. > Maybe one should be passed when a regular tfm file is used but even > then, loading a vf file is independent. > So, it's best to just ignore that message. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this how I understand TFM font and currect state of tex engines (actually pdftex, xetex and luatex): 1. to use any font in tex one need a TFM file (file name = fontname.TFM), that file actually contain informationabout font, not how exatly glyphs are constructed; 2. when [original] tex read a document file it searches for TFM and VF files, read them and write DVI file with information about that files; 3. after that user can send file to printer or publisher to print it on printer. As I understand the purpose of checksum was to be sure that publisher or printer would use exatly the same fonts as user. If user converts DVI file to PS/PDF one on his/she computer using dvips or dvipdfm* the checksum mostly useless, assuming files are not corrupted. Nowadays pdftex, xetex and luatex are widely used and most time users generate PDF files on the same computer they write documents, send PDF files which have they own mechanism to check font consistency. But still there are [plenty] DVI files around, as well as luatex engine might generate DVI file. The convertion to PS/PDF is performed by dvips/dvipdfm* programs, that's ok. But what about luatex with DVI output? My conclusion: 1. if PDF output is only interesting then it is Ok, ignore that message, because font information is already in PDF and PDF programs should deal with it; 2. if DVI output is concerned then luatex _must_ be consistent with pdftex (also can write DVI files), which, imho (don't check), takes care about both TFM and VF checksums. --- WBR, Vladimir Lomov -- The happiest time of a person's life is after his first divorce. -- J.K. Galbraith ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________