Re: texfont produces faked ligatures with ec encoding

["Mojca Miklavec" <mojca.miklavec.lists@gmail.com>]

On 8/6/06, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2006, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
> > Sorry, I haven't followed this thread closely (so I have no idea if this
> > has already been solved), but I had a similar symptom a while ago. It
> > turned out that it was something with the default EC.enc that ships with
> > tetex. Can you try to do the conversion again, this time using lm-ec.enc
> > instead of EC.enc? I can send a longer explanation if that's of
> > interest, but I found that it solved the problem in my case.
>
> Thanks for that hint. There is no file lm-ec.enc in my installation

Hmmm ... how old is your ConTeXt then?
You should install the new verision of Latin Modern, but recent
version of ConTeXt doesn't work with the old version of Latin Modern.

> but
> ec-var-lm.enc. If I add a --variant=var-lm to the parameters for texfont
> (or alternatively create a symbolic link ec.ec -> ec-var-lm.enc in my
> private texmf tree), then the ligatures work correctly! Unfortunately,
> umlauts don't work anymore, both typed directly (ä, ö, ü. ß, ...) and with
> the TeX commands ("a, "o, "u, "s, ...). Did you have problems with umlauts
> as well using lm-ec.enc? Maybe I should try cork.enc (--encoding=cork)
> instead?

Cork won't help you. It's just as bad as ec.enc (they're just synonyms
- both are old and kind-of-obsolete, but nobody wants to modernise
them; they say that you have to write your own for the usage with
recent fonts).

You can try if you'll have more luck with this one (should be more or
less equivalent with ec-lm.enc if you would have the latest version of
LM installed):
    http://www.tug.org/fontname/tex256.enc

ec.enc would give you way too many missing glyphs anyway.

Mojca