top margin is too small on Linux

[shiblon]

Originally reported on Google Code with ID 97

When using Latex --> dvips --> ps2pdf method, since the paper size is define by the
style file, the system default of a4 is used in dvips, which causes too small top margin
in the pdf file. Actually, the command: "dvips -t letter -Ppdf -G0 $(latexfile).dvi
-o" should be used in this case.

Is there a way to pass the paper type into the makefile other than from the \documentclass?

Reported by veranoplace on 2010-11-03 21:05:41

[shiblon]

Which makefile version are you using?

Reported by shiblon@google.com on 2010-11-04 13:19:45

[shiblon]

2.2.0-rc5

Reported by veranoplace on 2010-11-04 21:19:14

[shiblon]

Ah.  I have to admit, you're the first person I've heard of to use 2.2.0 for a dvips
workflow, which is probably why you found a bug with it :)

Thanks for submitting the bug.  Now, to make sure I understand everything you're telling
me, can you help clarify a few things that confused me about this?

- It seems like you don't want -Ppdf for dvips, since it really should be producing
postscript output, right?  You probably want dvips to read config.ps, so -Pps is more
appropriate here.

- Which documentclass are you using?  Is it something that doesn't understand letterpaper?
 If it does, the makefile should extract that and pass the appropriate option to dvips.

When you say that the paper size is defined in the style file, do you mean that it
is requiring something like the geometry package and setting it there?  In that case,
*also* specifying it in the documentclass is how I have gotten around things like that
in the past.

The old makefile used to support a special %%PAPERSIZE comment, which would let you
specify things like %%PAPERSIZE=letter.  Ultimately I discarded that because it meant
a lot of repetition.  However, we could add it back in as an optional way of specifying
paper size - I don't think it would be too hard to do.

Finally, in order to get the dvips -> ps2pdf behavior, you had to set a variable in
the makefile.  Should we just make dvips options available as such a variable, too?
 Then you could do relatively arbitrary things to it....

Anyway, lots of thoughts.  Let me know what you think.

Reported by shiblon on 2010-11-05 14:11:23

[shiblon]

Thanks for your reply.

I am writing paper using the journal's template. Because the figures are all in EPS
format, I chose the traditional dvips method to produce PDF files. I don't know much
about how dvips works, but I was told the -Ppdf option to dvips was required to make
it include Type 1 (scalable) fonts in the PS file.

I think the easiest way to express the problem I have is to give an example. The latex
template and the style file from the journal are attached. When I make it with your
makefile, the top margin appears too small. But if I use

dvips -t letter -Ppdf -G0 agutmpl.dvi -o
ps2pdf agutmpl.ps

The top margin shows correctly. Thanks.

Reported by veranoplace on 2010-11-06 03:46:01

---

• Attachment: AGUTeX.cls
• Attachment: agutmpl.tex

[shiblon]

Two things:

1) You can just convert the .eps files to .pdf and then include them (without specifying
the .pdf extension) in your document.  Then you can use the default and better tested
pdflatex toolchain.

2) I'm having a hard time reproducing your problem :(.  I tried compiling it as you
sent it, and with the (ignored by the class file) "letterpaper" option in the documentclass.
 I used

  make BUILD_STRATEGY=latex agutmpl

and got the same result both times.  I also built the .dvi file both ways and ran dvips
with the -tletter option and didn't see any difference in margins.

3) I actually went to great lengths to make sure that, even if you are only building
to .ps, all fonts are embedded.  I use 'gs' directly to create the .pdf file from the
.ps file, and have verified that fonts are embedded.  If they aren't, that's a bug,
so I'd definitely like to know if that isn't happening.

Reported by shiblon on 2010-11-07 01:46:21

[shiblon]

It is true that using the pdflatex gives correct pdf file. One solution, as you said,
is convert all the eps files to the formats pdflatex accepts.

When using latex, however, the dvi and ps files look the same as those created by pdflatex.
But the pdf files are different (attached). Did you look at the pdf files? I used

BUILD_STRATEGY      ?= latex

to create the agutmpl_latex.pdf file.

BTW, I am using redhat EL5. If you cannot reproduce the problem, is that because you
are using different version of linux?

Reported by veranoplace on 2010-11-10 01:37:56

---

• _Attachment: agutmpl_latex.pdf_
• _Attachment: agutmpl_pdflatex.pdf_

[shiblon]

Yes, I looked at the pdf output for both toolchains.  What LaTeX distribution is used
by RHEL5?  I'm using TexLive 2010, and I'm guessing that the version of ghostscript
is different (I have GPL Ghostscript 8.70).

Either way, if using the pdflatex toolchain (with .eps converted to .pdf) works for
you, I would just go with that.

Reported by shiblon on 2010-11-11 14:59:16