Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #191417 > unrolled thread

PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Greg Marks <gtmarks@gmail.com> - 2018-01-23 01:30 +0100
    Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2018-01-23 02:00 +0100
    Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> - 2018-01-23 02:20 +0100
      Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2018-01-23 04:40 +0100
      Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-01-23 11:20 +0100
        Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> - 2018-01-23 14:50 +0100
    Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-23 11:10 +0100
      Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-23 11:30 +0100
        Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> - 2018-01-23 14:40 +0100
          [solved]Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-25 22:10 +0100
            Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-26 03:40 +0100
              Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2018-01-26 10:20 +0100
                Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-01-27 05:20 +0100

#191417 — PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
The PDF file in question can be downloaded from the site:

   https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11856-017-1616-6

however, you might need an institutional subscription to view the full
document, so I am temporarily posting a copy here:

   https://gmarks.org/cklppaper.pdf

The file displays correctly using any of these programs: evince
(version 3.22.1), zathura (version 0.3.7), acroread (version 9.5.5),
mupdf (version 1.9a), xournal (version 0.4.8), gv (version 3.7.4).
As you can perhaps confirm, the file does not display correctly--one
sees only scattered mathematical symbols throughout the pages--if it is
opened with any of the following programs: qpdfview (version 0.4.14),
xpdf (version 3.04), okular (version 0.26.1).  For example, here are
screenshots of what the third page of the PDF file looks like on my
machine as displayed in qpdfview and mupdf, respectively:

   https://gmarks.org/q03.png
   https://gmarks.org/m03.png
  
The file prints correctly to a Postscript printer using lpr from the
command line.

Two questions: (1) Can anyone explain why the file opens correctly with
certain PDF viewers but not with others?  (2) Is there a way to convert
it to a PDF file that renders correctly in every viewer?

Regarding question (1), I don't think the PDF version of the file
(version 1.6) is relevant; other PDF documents with this PDF version
display correctly with qpdfview, etc.  I don't think it has to do with
the fact that qpdfview uses the Poppler library for rendering PDFs,
as programs that displayed the document correctly use Poppler as well.

Regarding question (2), I've tried running pdftops (which generates
numerous "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry" syntax errors) followed by
ps2pdf; the new PDF file still displays incorrectly using qpdfview, etc.
Likewise pdf2ps followed by ps2pdf: the resulting PDF file appears in
qpdfview as gibberish, albeit different gibberish than the original PDF
file.  Another failed attempt: "gs -q -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pdfwrite
-sOutputFile=new.pdf -c .setpdfwrite -f cklppaper.pdf" also produces
a new PDF file that will not display in qpdfview.

Here is some additional information.  I opened the file on a different,
older Debian machine and was unable to reproduce the problem.  The PDF
file displayed correctly using qpdfview (version 0.4.14).  Then I
ran "sudo apt-get update && sudo aptitude safe-upgrade," after which
qpdfview (version 0.4.14) no longer displayed the PDF file correctly.
A number of packages were upgraded; I think the ones that caused the
problem with qpdfview were:

   poppler-utils (0.48.0-2+deb9u1) over (0.48.0-2)
   libpoppler-qt5-1:amd64 (0.48.0-2+deb9u1) over (0.48.0-2)
   libpoppler-qt4-4:amd64 (0.48.0-2+deb9u1) over (0.48.0-2)
   libpoppler-glib8:amd64 (0.48.0-2+deb9u1) over (0.48.0-2)
   libpoppler64:amd64 (0.48.0-2+deb9u1) over (0.48.0-2)

(Various other packages were upgraded, such as imagemagick-6-common
and libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0, but I don't think those are relevant.)

Regards,
Greg Marks

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#191418

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 23/01/18 13:28, Greg Marks wrote:
> I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
> gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
> The PDF file in question can be downloaded from the site:
> 
>    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11856-017-1616-6
> 
> however, you might need an institutional subscription to view the full
> document, so I am temporarily posting a copy here:
> 
>    https://gmarks.org/cklppaper.pdf
> 
> The file displays correctly using any of these programs: evince
> (version 3.22.1), zathura (version 0.3.7), acroread (version 9.5.5),
> mupdf (version 1.9a), xournal (version 0.4.8), gv (version 3.7.4).
> As you can perhaps confirm, the file does not display correctly--one
> sees only scattered mathematical symbols throughout the pages--if it is
> opened with any of the following programs: qpdfview (version 0.4.14),
> xpdf (version 3.04), okular (version 0.26.1).  For example, here are
> screenshots of what the third page of the PDF file looks like on my
> machine as displayed in qpdfview and mupdf, respectively:
> 
>    https://gmarks.org/q03.png
>    https://gmarks.org/m03.png
>   
> The file prints correctly to a Postscript printer using lpr from the
> command line.

FWIW:
1) it also displays ok in atril
2) The 'scattered mathematical symbols' appear to me to be in the right
places - ie it's just that they're the only bit that displays correctly.
Perhaps some kind of missing font issue?
3) the stderr out from (at least) okular and xpdf look like they might
be useful to someone who understands the topic better, but do look like
something is missing.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191419

On 22-01-2018, at 18h 28'13", Greg Marks wrote about "PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software"
> I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
> gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
> [...]
> numerous "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry" syntax errors) followed by
> [...]

I encounter similar issue with my bank statements... xpdf will not
show any glyphs, only lines and logo, same as okular; gv on the other
hand will show everything. The pdf files are version 1.4. Funny is
that older files (still 1.4) will show fine with xpdf and okular. Only
newer ones have this issue... xpdf will spit out few hundreds times
Syntax Error: "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry".

I can't ping point the difference between the older files and the
newer ones, except the size. The newer ones are more than twice the
size: older files 120K, newer ones 270K. The files are mostly binary
with some ASCII. For example in older files, line 4 starts with this:
"<</ColorSpace[/Indexed/DeviceRGB 255("
while in the newer files line 4 starts with this:
"<</Type/XObject/ColorSpace[/Indexed/DeviceRGB 255(".

I assume that is something wrong with the fonts. The newer files may
be less permissive to substitute fonts when viewed. Some pdf viewer
chose to ignore that or not.

I do not know how to fix it, nor to explain what is going on.

Ionel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191422

My guess is Adobe's security features are getting in your way.  Files 
have to be unprotected before any full accessibility checks can be done 
on them and the security protection adobe put in on their newer pdf 
files defeats accessibility checking when enabled.  If whatever software 
you use does not completely disable adobe's security protection, I think 
it entirely reasonable the protection at most would fail to show full 
contents of the files.

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018, Ionel Mugurel Ciob?c? wrote:

> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:57:39
> From: Ionel Mugurel Ciob?c? <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software
> Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:15:16 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> 
> On 22-01-2018, at 18h 28'13", Greg Marks wrote about "PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software"
>> I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
>> gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
>> [...]
>> numerous "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry" syntax errors) followed by
>> [...]
>
> I encounter similar issue with my bank statements... xpdf will not
> show any glyphs, only lines and logo, same as okular; gv on the other
> hand will show everything. The pdf files are version 1.4. Funny is
> that older files (still 1.4) will show fine with xpdf and okular. Only
> newer ones have this issue... xpdf will spit out few hundreds times
> Syntax Error: "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry".
>
> I can't ping point the difference between the older files and the
> newer ones, except the size. The newer ones are more than twice the
> size: older files 120K, newer ones 270K. The files are mostly binary
> with some ASCII. For example in older files, line 4 starts with this:
> "<</ColorSpace[/Indexed/DeviceRGB 255("
> while in the newer files line 4 starts with this:
> "<</Type/XObject/ColorSpace[/Indexed/DeviceRGB 255(".
>
> I assume that is something wrong with the fonts. The newer files may
> be less permissive to substitute fonts when viewed. Some pdf viewer
> chose to ignore that or not.
>
> I do not know how to fix it, nor to explain what is going on.
>
> Ionel
>
>

-- 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191426

On 2018-01-23, Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> wrote:
> On 22-01-2018, at 18h 28'13", Greg Marks wrote about "PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software"
>> I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
>> gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
>> [...]
>> numerous "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry" syntax errors) followed by
>> [...]
>
> I encounter similar issue with my bank statements... xpdf will not
> show any glyphs, only lines and logo, same as okular; gv on the other
> hand will show everything. The pdf files are version 1.4. Funny is
> that older files (still 1.4) will show fine with xpdf and okular. Only
> newer ones have this issue... xpdf will spit out few hundreds times
> Syntax Error: "Missing or bad Type3 CharProc entry".

Same problem here with bank statements (recent bank statements unviewable in
xpdf but viewable in evince).

(Actually it appears the pdfs viewable in xpdf are 'PDF document, version 1.4'
and the pdfs that are not are 'PDF document, version 1.7' according to 'file'.)

> I can't ping point the difference between the older files and the
> newer ones, except the size. The newer ones are more than twice the

Seems to be a pinpointable difference here.

Old bank statement:

curty@einstein:~/releve$ pdffonts dec2014.pdf 
name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- ---------
Times-Roman                          Type 1            no  no  no       8  0
Helvetica                            Type 1            no  no  no       7  0
Helvetica-Bold                       Type 1            no  no  no       5  0
Courier                              Type 1            no  no  no       9  0

New bank statement:

curty@einstein:~/releve$ pdffonts dec2017.pdf 
name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- ---------
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      10  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      11  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      12  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      13  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      14  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      15  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      16  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      17  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      18  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      19  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      20  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      21  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      22  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      23  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      26  0
[none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      27  0

The OP's pdf shows a slew of Type 3 fonts also.

I read installing 'cm-super' might magically fix things so I did, but it didn't
(although I believe the output of pdffonts on the cklppaper.pdf changed
afterwards with some of the Type 3 fonts subsisted with Type 1--is that
possible)?

Anyhow I'm a blind man trying to lead the sighted.

(PS: Seems like all the math more or less renders in xpdf when viewing 'cklppaper.pdf'
here.) 

-- 
“True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class
is running the country.” – Kurt Vonnegut

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191432

On 23-01-2018, at 10h 11'43", Curt wrote about "Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software"
> 
> Same problem here with bank statements (recent bank statements unviewable in
> xpdf but viewable in evince).
> 
> (Actually it appears the pdfs viewable in xpdf are 'PDF document, version 1.4'
> and the pdfs that are not are 'PDF document, version 1.7' according to 'file'.)

Here are all 1.4:

file dec2016.pdf aug2017.pdf
dec2016.pdf: PDF document, version 1.4
aug2017.pdf: PDF document, version 1.4

> 
> Seems to be a pinpointable difference here.
> 
> Old bank statement:
> 
> curty@einstein:~/releve$ pdffonts dec2014.pdf 
> name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
> ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- ---------
> Times-Roman                          Type 1            no  no  no       8  0
> Helvetica                            Type 1            no  no  no       7  0
> Helvetica-Bold                       Type 1            no  no  no       5  0
> Courier                              Type 1            no  no  no       9  0
> 
> New bank statement:
> 
> curty@einstein:~/releve$ pdffonts dec2017.pdf 
> name                                 type              emb sub uni object ID
> ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- ---------
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      10  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      11  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      12  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      13  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      14  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      15  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      16  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      17  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      18  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      19  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      20  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      21  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      22  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      23  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      26  0
> [none]                               Type 3            yes no  no      27  0
> 

In my case:

pdffonts dec2016.pdf
name                 type              encoding emb sub uni object ID
-------------------- ----------------- -------- --- --- --- ---------
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes     19  0
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes     20  0
Helvetica            Type 1            Custom   no  no  no      21  0
Courier              Type 1            Custom   no  no  no      22  0

pdffonts aug2017.pdf
name                 type              encoding emb sub uni object ID
-------------------- ----------------- -------- --- --- --- ---------
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes      7  0
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes      8  0
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes      9  0
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes     10  0
[none]               Type 3            Custom   yes no  yes     11  0



Ionel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191425

Hi,

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:28:13 -0600
Greg Marks <gtmarks@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have encountered a peculiar situation where a PDF file displays as
> gibberish with certain PDF viewers but displays correctly with others.
> The PDF file in question can be downloaded from the site:
> 
>    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11856-017-1616-6
> 
> however, you might need an institutional subscription to view the full
> document, so I am temporarily posting a copy here:
> 
>    https://gmarks.org/cklppaper.pdf
> 
> The file displays correctly using any of these programs: evince
> (version 3.22.1), zathura (version 0.3.7), acroread (version 9.5.5),
> mupdf (version 1.9a), xournal (version 0.4.8), gv (version 3.7.4).
> As you can perhaps confirm, the file does not display correctly--one
> sees only scattered mathematical symbols throughout the pages--if it is
> opened with any of the following programs: qpdfview (version 0.4.14),
> xpdf (version 3.04), okular (version 0.26.1).

just a shot in the dark: I think okular and qpdfview use qt, some of the
"working" viewers seem to use gtk. Not sure about the toolkit xpdf and
some of the other programs use, but maybe the problem has something to do
with the toolkit in use rather than with a bug in the applications?

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

The man on tops walks a lonely street; the "chain" of command is often a
noose.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191427

Hi again,

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:03:24 +0100
Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> wrote:

> just a shot in the dark: I think okular and qpdfview use qt, some of the
> "working" viewers seem to use gtk. Not sure about the toolkit xpdf and
> some of the other programs use, but maybe the problem has something to
> do with the toolkit in use rather than with a bug in the applications?

uh no, appears to be rather this bug in libpoppler:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886733

Similar bug reports are:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886798
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783607

Semms like this has been fixed in unstable meanwhile.

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

We have phasers, I vote we blast 'em!
		-- Bailey, "The Corbomite Maneuver", stardate 1514.2

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191431

On 23-01-2018, at 11h 18'26", Michael Lange wrote about "Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software"
> Hi again,
> 
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:03:24 +0100
> Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> wrote:
> 
> uh no, appears to be rather this bug in libpoppler:
> 
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=886733

Downgraded some poppler packages and I can view now all pdf files
with xpdf. The difference between the old and new files now (for me)
is that they use (visible) different fonts.

Ionel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191558 — [solved]Re: PDF displayed incorrectly by certain software

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 14:21:59 +0100
Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> wrote:

> Downgraded some poppler packages and I can view now all pdf files
> with xpdf. The difference between the old and new files now (for me)
> is that they use (visible) different fonts.

Just for the record, today's upgrade to stretch's poppler packages fixed
this issue, qdfview and xpdf display the affected pdf-files properly
again.

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

Punishment becomes ineffective after a certain point.  Men become
insensitive.
		-- Eneg, "Patterns of Force", stardate 2534.7

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191574

On Thu 25 Jan 2018 at 22:05:27 (+0100), Michael Lange wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 14:21:59 +0100
> Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă <I.M.Ciobica@upcmail.nl> wrote:
> 
> > Downgraded some poppler packages and I can view now all pdf files
> > with xpdf. The difference between the old and new files now (for me)
> > is that they use (visible) different fonts.
> 
> Just for the record, today's upgrade to stretch's poppler packages fixed
> this issue, qdfview and xpdf display the affected pdf-files properly
> again.

Not for me. I have the same/a similar issue with Chase credit card
statements. The blue graphical field separators and their text display
correctly, but the items area is blank.

However, if I scroll the pages, the items on the penultimate page
are displayed when I scroll up to it. The items on the first page
are always blank.

But the main difference between the old and new versions (upgraded
today) is that the new version spews error messages from the
configuration files, 152 of them in all.

Here are the first few. (The program stammers.)

Config Error: Unknown config file command 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-arabic:2)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'cidToUnicode' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:2)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:3)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:4)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:5)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'cMapDir' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:6)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'toUnicodeDir' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:7)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
Config Error: Unknown config file command 'fontFileCC' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:8)
Config Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf

This is a days-old installation of stretch 9.3 with ~/.xpdfrc hidden.
(Talking of which, they do seem to have fixed many of the interactive
commands (I use zoom, turn & continuous) that were missing throughout
jessie.)

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191583

Hi,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:31:36 -0600
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

> But the main difference between the old and new versions (upgraded
> today) is that the new version spews error messages from the
> configuration files, 152 of them in all.
> 
> Here are the first few. (The program stammers.)
> 
> Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-arabic:2) Config Error: Some work
> needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
> Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'cidToUnicode' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:2) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:3) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:4) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:5) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'cMapDir' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:6) Config Error:
> Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler
> version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'toUnicodeDir' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:7) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf Config Error: Unknown config file command
> 'fontFileCC' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-chinese-simplified:8) Config
> Error: Some work needs to be done to suppport this option in the
> Poppler version of xpdf
> 
> This is a days-old installation of stretch 9.3 with ~/.xpdfrc hidden.
> (Talking of which, they do seem to have fixed many of the interactive
> commands (I use zoom, turn & continuous) that were missing throughout
> jessie.)

I get these same error messages here even when I open an empty xdpf
window, so they seem not to be related to the document.
Of course I cannot tell about the document you have, I have been speaking
only about the document the OP mentioned which works now with both xpdf
and qpdfview here.

Regards

Michael


.-.. .. ...- .   .-.. --- -. --.   .- -. -..   .--. .-. --- ... .--. . .-.

Either one of us, by himself, is expendable.  Both of us are not.
		-- Kirk, "The Devil in the Dark", stardate 3196.1

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#191638

On Fri 26 Jan 2018 at 10:14:22 (+0100), Michael Lange wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 20:31:36 -0600
> David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > But the main difference between the old and new versions (upgraded
> > today) is that the new version spews error messages from the
> > configuration files, 152 of them in all.
> > 
> > Here are the first few. (The program stammers.)
> > 
> > Config Error: Unknown config file command
> > 'unicodeMap' (/usr/share/xpdf/xpdfrc-arabic:2) Config Error: Some work
> > needs to be done to suppport this option in the Poppler version of xpdf
[…]
> > 
> > This is a days-old installation of stretch 9.3 with ~/.xpdfrc hidden.
> > (Talking of which, they do seem to have fixed many of the interactive
> > commands (I use zoom, turn & continuous) that were missing throughout
> > jessie.)
> 
> I get these same error messages here even when I open an empty xdpf
> window, so they seem not to be related to the document.
> Of course I cannot tell about the document you have, I have been speaking
> only about the document the OP mentioned which works now with both xpdf
> and qpdfview here.

It's a very similar situation to the bank document cited earlier:

Old:
$ pdffonts chase-2015-09.pdf
name                                 type              encoding         emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- --- --- --- ---------
Helvetica                            Type 1            WinAnsi          no  no  no      37  0
Helvetica-Bold                       Type 1            WinAnsi          no  no  no      12  0
$ 

New:
$ pdffonts chase-2015-10.pdf
name                                 type              encoding         emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- --- --- --- ---------
[none]                               Type 3            Custom           yes no  yes     43  0
[none]                               Type 3            Custom           yes no  yes     37  0
Helvetica-Bold                       Type 1            WinAnsi          no  no  no      36  0
[none]                               Type 3            Custom           yes no  yes     44  0
$ 

With a newer PC running stretch, I can page through the documents
a little faster. Page 1 of the bill always has blank items, and
by items I mean any information connected to my account.
Page 2 is similar, though most of it is "fine print", and that
displays correctly. Page 3 has most of the account items (only
a few fit on page 1) and these are usually blank. Page 4 is
usually almost entirely unused.

Whether page 3 displays correctly seems to be essentially
unpredictable, it comes and goes. Also, the box round the totals,
which has to be placed according to the number of items, sometimes
appears at completely the wrong X,Y position on the page. So it
seems that it's not just the embedded custom-encoded fonts causing
a problem, but the whole page-rendering process.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web