regression in TeX Live 2023 concerning some math characters

[Vincent Lefevre]

On 2023-11-24 10:55:23 +0100, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> The format creation is not an installation script. It is a special
> tex compilation. And I certainly expect that a format takes e.g. my
> texmfhome or texinputs into account. I actually quite often generate
> local formats with the development code. And our testsuite generates
> formats with special settings too.

This is still a bad idea to use the same environment variable
for install time and use time.

So, perhaps the cleanup should be done by the Debian package.
This is needed, because there is no namespace for the filenames,
and the end user does not know what could be used internally
in the future (and even now, the end user doesn't know all the
internals, so that there could still be a filename clash).

> In any case: a current LaTeX reads glyphtounicode.tex into the
> format, so if you have a local one it will be used. If you don't
> want that, change the name of your file to e.g.
> vincent-glyphtounicode.tex (and perhaps shorten it) and load that
> when needed. 

The name glyphtounicode.tex was chosen on purpose in 2021 in order to
override the system one when using pdflatex, because the system one
was triggering a bug in Ghostscript[*]. I've done various tests, and
though this bug may still be present, Ghostscript seems to generate
small ToUnicode CMaps for the needed characters (the more complete
ToUnicode CMap generated by pdflatex is dropped, but it seems useless
in practice). So they is no longer need for any workaround.

[*] https://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704674

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent at vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)