Okular preferred linux PDF reader

Duncan 1i5t5.duncan at cox.net
Mon Dec 7 00:46:39 GMT 2009

Anne Wilson posted on Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:35:34 +0000 as excerpted:

> On Sunday 06 December 2009 15:16:32 Duncan wrote:
>> Christian Mikovits posted on Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:20:32 +0100 as
>> excerpted:
>> >> On Sunday Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> >>> Here is an example of wrong rendering in Okular:
>> >>>
>> >>>    http://i45.tinypic.com/2vc9dlx.png
>> >>>
>> >>> Here is how Acrobat renders it:
>> >>>
>> >>>    http://i48.tinypic.com/3028c5v.jpg
>> >>>
>> >>> And the PDF is:
>> >>>
>> >>>    http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf
>> >
>> > Funny, also no problem for me with okular:
>> >
>> > http://i45.tinypic.com/2vc9dlx.png
> Isn't that the original 'bad' URL?

Good eyes! =:^)  I took that URL as the "good" sample he claimed he was 
seeing, but now that I look at it, you're right.  It's the original bad 

>> "Why Unix Vendors".  It's pg 50 here
>> If you look at it, that looks way more like his "bad" rendering Okular
>> than his "good" rendering Acrobat.  The font is "fat" just as in
>> Okular, not the thin one Acrobat uses.
> It isn't here.

> Since Christian and I found different font substitution tables in the
> properties, that would suggest that the fonts are not embedded.  They
> are standard Microsoft fonts, so it's assumed that there is no need to
> embed.

Mine looks like that bad one.  However, I don't have a lot of "extra" 
fonts installed, only the basic ones, so if nothing's embedded, that's 
not unexpected.

> The DejaVu font used here is not identical to the Acrobat rendering of
> course - the font is certainly a different one - but it is neat, thin
> and a suitable substitute.  I would imagine that the more likely culprit
> is the inability to find a suitable substitution font on Nikos' system
> (or lack of look-up table?).

That's possible, even probable, as the font he's seeing is the font I'm 
seeing, and I know I don't have a lot of extra fonts for it to choose 

However, if the font's not embedded, then Acrobat has to be pulling it 
from somewhere as well.  I guess he didn't say specifically either way, 
but if the Acrobat he mentioned is Acrobat for Linux running on the same 
system, then it has to be pulling the font from the same pool of fonts.  
If that's the case, then the fonts should be available to both, but 
obviously the substitution algorithm is rather different.

So I guess the next step is to get confirmation of whether the Acrobat 
sample he got was from the same Linux installed on the same machine, or 

Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.

More information about the kde mailing list