rro@lll-lcc.UUCP (03/31/87)
Pursuant to a request for a bibliography that I maintain using latex and bibtex, I uuencoded the .dvi result and emailed that. My correspondent reported that the uudecoded file could not be printed at his site due to an error about a "missing font." Could this be because I had used 12 point font size? If so, what size should be regarded as universal? If not, any other ideas? It would certainly be easier to use the .dvi file for distribution instead of the .tex file + the .bbl file + the .aux file + the custom .sty file. -- ______________________________________ Rod Oldehoeft Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory rro@lll-crg.arpa
ken@rochester.UUCP (03/31/87)
In theory, dvi is transportable because it is a stream of binary bytes and not word aligned or anything that might cause byte ordering problems. Provided you manage transmission of system dependent binary files. You appear to have no problems there. In practice, if one site is running cm fonts and the other am fonts, the dvi file is not portable. That doesn't seem to be the case here. So maybe it is a single missing font. The local guide to LaTeX should tell you which fonts are available (the local guru should maintain this). It is when you use large sizes for titles, etc, that you're likely to run into a missing font. With sources, your recipient can do something about it (maybe). With the dvi file they can only complain. Very similar to sending out object files instead of source. Ken