Re: ps and pdf question

[Gilles Sadowski]

Hello.

> > Anybody who wants to play tricks with ps files (and I am occasionally 
> > one of them) is free to invoke lilypond --ps, so this is a red herring. 
> >   I agree with Laura: we should treat the .ps files are temporary and 
> > delete them.  I have a script that does this automatically, but I think 
> > that deleting the .ps files is a good default option.  Most users don't 
> > want ps, and many users who investigate the ps files won't know how to 
> > deal with them properly.  Anybody who really wants a ps file can invoke 
> > with --ps.
> 
> What is the big deal with pdf?
> >From what I understand is that they are "portable", but most pdf's I 
> get from others does not show up good or at all in gv, xpdf or evince.
> It seems that they are "portable" in the sens that work with ths latest
> Adobe acrobat.
> 
> For me, pdf means trouble. Why should I ever want to produce pdf's?
> 
> And btw, the pdf's produces by current lilypond does not print either
> on my (postscript) printer.
>

I also have problems when printing the pdf. And my postscript printer
doesn't like the ps produced by lilypond: it spits out pages and pages, each
one with a single error message on it, most of them about "unknown command".
>From an earlier message, I understand that it is probably related to the
binary font description in PS level 3.

So, I too, would rather have lilypond convert automatically to PS level 2.

Thanks,
Gilles