There is some issue related to the dvipng hack that I dont
> understand. Robert and Samuel want to apply the hack to
> dvipng version 1.6. I also have version 1.6, but if I
> apply the hack, then my output doesnt look right. Whats
> going on here? Are there two OS dependent versions of
> dvipng-1.6?
According to the release notes for 1.6
The 1.6 release adds proper alpha channel support and xcolor
support. It also reestablishes identification of preview-latex'
tightpage mode option.
Not sure why we are seeing differences between 1.6 on different
platforms, unless there is an endian issue in the png files.
JDH
I don't know how to proceed on this. Do I check the platform and apply the
hack for darwin? Would that break usetex for any other mac users out there?
···
On Thursday 09 February 2006 10:42, John Hunter wrote:
> There is some issue related to the dvipng hack that I dont
> understand. Robert and Samuel want to apply the hack to
> dvipng version 1.6. I also have version 1.6, but if I
> apply the hack, then my output doesnt look right. Whats
> going on here? Are there two OS dependent versions of
> dvipng-1.6?
According to the release notes for 1.6
The 1.6 release adds proper alpha channel support and xcolor
support. It also reestablishes identification of preview-latex'
tightpage mode option.
Not sure why we are seeing differences between 1.6 on different
platforms, unless there is an endian issue in the png files.
This is a good question…
My suspicion is that this is a problem specific to the dvipng in the I-Installer teTeX distribution. We could simply suggest to mac users to upgrade to 1.7, but dvipng is actually a pain to compile. I tried to update, but the configure script was never able to find my freetype (I only have freetype2 installed – does dvipng require freetype 1?), and I gave up. It also wants other graphic libraries, which makes me think that this is something that people will hate more than the Ghostscript requirement.
My only suggestion is to poll Mac users about dvipng versions and problems (or lack of problems). Perhaps a short term solution would be to create an rc option that users could toggle if they were having problems. This would at least allow us to investigate the problem further, without too much hacking on the part of the user.
-Rob.
···
On Feb 9, 2006, at 12:08 PM, Darren Dale wrote:
I don’t know how to proceed on this. Do I check the platform and apply the
hack for darwin? Would that break usetex for any other mac users out there?
Rob Hetland, Assistant Professor
Dept of Oceanography, Texas A&M University
p: 979-458-0096, f: 979-845-6331
e: hetland@…760…, w: http://pong.tamu.edu
I just committed a number of changes related to the usetex option. I modified
the way we scale text to handle changes in font size, this is handled by
latex now and closes a long standing bug related to the rendering of
extremely long strings. I believe the recent problem related to an errant
font command I introduced last week have also been resolved.
···
On Thursday 09 February 2006 13:20, Robert Hetland wrote:
My only suggestion is to poll Mac users about dvipng versions and
problems (or lack of problems). Perhaps a short term solution would
be to create an rc option that users could toggle if they were having
problems. This would at least allow us to investigate the problem
further, without too much hacking on the part of the user.
Mac users can use a temporary rc parameter to get nice results with usetex.
Just add text.dvipnghack : True to your matplotlibrc file.
Darren
I just committed to cvs an extensive cleanup of the usetex code in the
postscript backend. In the process, I think I resolved the clipping problem
people were reporting with ghostscript-7.07. Things look good on my machine,
at least.
I've tested every combination of the postscript backend with and without
usetex, with all three distiller options (None, ghostscript, and xpdf), and
didnt find any problems. But if a problem turns up, please let me know.
Darren