[tex-live] TeXlive infrastructure

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > Any idea how these afm's compare to the actual URW Type 1's?
> > Would it make sense to consider distributing these instead of
> > whatever we have now?
> >
> in addition, ok, instead: no (context uses urw afm files to generate
> metrics and as a result depends on related tfm names)

I fully agree that it is a bad idea to use the Adobe metrics files for
the URW fonts.

> > I don't know if the afm's we distribute now correspond to the
> > actual Type 1's, for that matter.
> >
> if not, then we should live with that fact, since different afm's
> would mean different derived metrics and different rendering

Fact is that in TeXLive the font files in type1/adobe/courier don't
match the corresponding metrics files in afm/adobe/courier.  Just to
name an example: The glyph `zcaron' is available in the PFBs but is
represented with a `CC' command (building up a composite glyph).  This
is clearly wrong.


    Werner