[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”)
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”) |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:11:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Jonas Hahnfeld via Discussions on LilyPond development
<lilypond-devel@gnu.org> writes:
> Am Freitag, den 19.06.2020, 11:47 +0200 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 7:45 PM Jonas Hahnfeld <hahnjo@hahnjo.de> wrote:
>> > Am Donnerstag, den 18.06.2020, 11:21 -0600 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
>> > > is it the difference between an output .ps file and an output .eps file?
>> >
>> > No, broken.ps file is only the driver for Ghostscript:
>> > mark /OutputFile (broken.pdf) (pdfwrite) finddevice putdeviceprops
>> > setdevice (broken.eps) run
>> >
>> > Both ways use the same broken.eps file:
>> > %!PS-Adobe-2.0 EPSF-2.0
>> >
>> > Yes, it's empty except for that line.
>>
>> That doesn't look like an EPS file that LilyPond should be producing.
>>
>> Let me do some research today where that comes from.
>
> No, this is the only smallest possible EPS file that shows the problem.
> I'm attaching the real file from LilyPond to this message, but the
> important part is probably that it contains no graphical objects.
That triggers some memory: this may not have anything to do with
autorotation? That GhostScript decides on landscape orientation
unexpectedly or so?
--
David Kastrup
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), (continued)
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jean Abou Samra, 2020/06/17
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Valentin Villenave, 2020/06/17
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Werner LEMBERG, 2020/06/17
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/18
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Carl Sorensen, 2020/06/18
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/18
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”),
David Kastrup <=
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2020/06/19
- Re: xdvipdfmx fails with some regtests (“Invalid object”), Jonas Hahnfeld, 2020/06/19