Re: UTF-8 font workaround

[Matěj Cepl]

On 2016-02-07, 20:24 GMT, Anton Kizilov wrote:
> different programs uses different font description files. Lout 
> comes with its own fonts, ghostscript uses its own fonts and 
> then we have to consider the search for the new created 
> metrics. It's all a little vague.So this is my situation.  

Make sure you differentiate between fonts and metrics. Most of 
the magic is done in metrics. So, for example 
https://matej.ceplovi.cz/ps-pdf/ce-fonts.lt leads to 
https://matej.ceplovi.cz/ps-pdf/ce-fonts.ps . I have just tested 
and this compiles to the PostScript with plain standard lout out 
of Fedora/RHEL package.

http://tldp.org/LDP/LG/issue27/adelman.html (and endless 
discussions on http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lout-users/ 
) helped me a lot. If you are after Russian, then I just hit on 
DuckDuckGo on https://www.linux.org.ru/forum/talks/4804445 and 
one of the most active Lout users used to be (a long long time 
ago) https://www.linkedin.com/in/valery-ushakov-02388a38

> I know that I must use ISO-8859-x encoding for the input file.  
> I know that I have to make/copy/transform glyph for the 
> printable output creation. I think it would be sufficient just 
> to remake available Type-1 Extended glyphs according to input 
> encoding standard. And than I have to make visible those new 
> glyphs to the Lout. And here comes the big question - How? Not 
> just by prefixing with -F new font directory, isn't it?
> Big thanks in advance,With respect,Anton Kizilov

Cannot you just have the particular files in the current 
directory?

Matěj

-- 
https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: address@hidden
GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB  25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC
 
http://xkcd.com/743/ … enough said.