Re: PostScript printing Latin-N (with N != 1)

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc>
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:35:31 +0100
> 
> On Wed, Jan 11 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> >> From: Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc>
> >> Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:55:15 +0100
> >> 
> >> With the patch and setup suggested by Kenichi Handa I was able to
> >> print Latin-9 but it was wrong for Latin-1.
> >
> > Emacs 21 and 22 doesn't support Latin-1 and Latin-9 in the same
> > character set.
> 
> I meant two different buffers.  One containing _only_ Latin-1, the
> other _only_ Latin-9 characters.

In that case, it might be something in how you set up the ps-mule
database.  Perhaps it doesn't support more than one Latin-n set, I
never tried to do something like that myself, I only ever set it for a
single Latin character set.

> >> Printing the same file (with the Euro) encoded in UTF-8 fails with:
> >> "bdf-read-font-info: BDF file etl24-unicode.bdf doesn't exist"
> >
> > Well, it's quite clear what it tells you, yes?
> 
> Sure, but I couldn't find this file neither in SuSE 9.2 or 10.0 nor on
> a Debian GNU/Linux box.  Unless most of the major GNU/Linux
> distributions include the required BDF fonts, using `bdf-font' is not
> a feasible solution for end users.

Here again you are too eager to generalize, I think: a single font is
missing, and already this is ``not a feasible solution''.  Given that
the current Emacs doesn't even support Unicode reasonably enough,
isn't it a tad too much to reject a package that covers most other
character sets?

> >> Printing the Thai example text from HELLO produces a PS file, but gs
> >> can't display the PS file (as in my previous mail):
> >
> > So gs also has problems, or so it seems.
> 
> Possible.  Or the created PS file is invalid.

I have a PostScript printer.  If you really want to know which one of
these possibilities is true, send me the PS file and I will look.