On Sat, 1 May 2021 at 23:21, Max Pyziur <pyz(a)brama.com> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Garry T. Williams wrote:
> On Friday, April 30, 2021 12:45:40 PM EDT Max Pyziur wrote:
>> I would be interested in suggestions from other paps users on their
> Heh. Never tried this program before. I always use a2ps instead.
> I tried --font="monospace 6" --columns=2 for code and it's very
> readable. Nicer than a2ps, if not as fancy. The font is denser or
> darker than a2ps (defaults).
The output for that is better for the use of the keyword "monospace" than
for the one that I specified under F34.
So, I tried a generic keyword and used --font="proportional 6" and the
result was of a lesser quality than for using "monospace" or the
better results I had under F33.
Are there font packages that were removed on the upgrade?
Or are there proportional postscript font packages that I should install
for the level of quality I had with F33.
The output now is that using something like --font="proportional 6" or
--font="Arial 6" is that it is uneven both vertically and horizontally:
- vertically: the line spacking is irregular
- horizontally: while proportional, some letters crwod each other or
The postscript code generated by paps and it includes outline paths
for the glyphs, so it does not provide the benefits of high quality font
"is [sic] text to postscript converter
similar to a2ps,
with emphasis on Unicode support. "
George N. White III