Return-Path: owner-linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi
Received: from joker.cs.hut.fi (root@joker.cs.hut.fi [130.233.40.32]) by keos.Helsinki.FI (8.6.4/H45) with SMTP id VAA26788 for <wirzeniu@cs.Helsinki.FI>; Tue, 8 Feb 1994 21:13:40 +0200
Received: from joker.cs.hut.fi by niksula.hut.fi id <48590-2>; Tue, 8 Feb 1994 21:09:07 +0200
From: "Linux Activists" <linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi>
To: "Linux-Activists" <linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi>
Reply-To: "Linux-Activists" <linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi>
X-Note1: Remember to put 'X-Mn-Key: DOC' to your mail body or header
Subject: Linux-Activists - DOC Channel digest. 94-1-8-14:17
X-Mn-Key: DOC
Sender: owner-linux-activists@joker.cs.hut.fi
Message-Id: <94Feb8.210907eet.48590-2@niksula.hut.fi>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 21:08:53 +0200
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Topics:
	 Re: Linux-Activists - DOC Channel digest. 94-1-7-21:53


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Thomas Dunbar <tdunbar@vtaix.cc.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: Linux-Activists - DOC Channel digest. 94-1-7-21:53
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 1994 13:45:01 +0200


> 
> 
> Topics:
> 	 Netguide Pre-Release
> 
> One more question, BTW: I've checked out using Postscript fonts
> instead of the TeX ones when producing the PS version. This greatly
> reduces the size of the resulting PS file; but the result looks rather
> misshapen. I am using the tfm files included in dvips. Am I missing
> something? Or is this the normal appearance of ghostscript fonts?

yes, this is just the less than optimal ghostscript fonts..on a real
ps printer it should look fine (if the problem is individual character
shape and not positioning)


> -- 
> Olaf Kirch		okir@monad.swb.de		    Darmstadt, FRG


-- 
Thomas Dunbar           phone: 703 231-3938
Virginia Tech             fax: 703 231-3714
100C Sandy Hall           WWW: http://milieu.grads.vt.edu/



------------------------------

End of DOC Digest
*****************
-------
