Created attachment 139225 [details] sample plot SUMMARY Scatter plots produced in R are not show in okular or qpdfview, but it works in MuPDF or Atril (see attachment). STEPS TO REPRODUCE 1. Open a PDF produced by R OBSERVED RESULT Observe the empty plot EXPECTED RESULT Observe the scatter plot SOFTWARE/OS VERSIONS Linux/KDE Plasma: openSUSE Leap 15.2 KDE Plasma Version: 5.18.6 KDE Frameworks Version: 5.71.0 Qt Version: 5.12.7 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Poppler 21.05.0
Cannot confirm this bug in Okular 21.07.70 (poppler 20.12.1). The document is rendered as expected.
Wroks here too, i guess it's another issue of the wrong font being substituted, can you attach a capture of the file->properties->fonts dialog?
(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #2) > Wroks here too, i guess it's another issue of the wrong font being > substituted, can you attach a capture of the file->properties->fonts dialog? Sure, it's attached.
Created attachment 139244 [details] file->properties->fonts
Created attachment 139245 [details] issue
(In reply to Oleksandr Ostrenko from comment #3) > (In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #2) > > Wroks here too, i guess it's another issue of the wrong font being > > substituted, can you attach a capture of the file->properties->fonts dialog? > > Sure, it's attached. Can you try to remove texlive-tex-gyre-fonts (and install some Helvetica font, e.g. LiberationSans) temporarily? Thanks in advance for your answer.
(In reply to Yuri Chornoivan from comment #6) > (In reply to Oleksandr Ostrenko from comment #3) > > (In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #2) > > > Wroks here too, i guess it's another issue of the wrong font being > > > substituted, can you attach a capture of the file->properties->fonts dialog? > > > > Sure, it's attached. > > Can you try to remove texlive-tex-gyre-fonts (and install some Helvetica > font, e.g. LiberationSans) temporarily? > > Thanks in advance for your answer. I removed texlive-tex-gyre-fonts, but the issue persists. A capture of the fonts tab is attached, showing that LiberationSans is used now instead.
Created attachment 139246 [details] file->properties->fonts 2
Roboto is a terrible substitution for ZapfDingbats (which my quess is what's being used for the dots). Install a package that gives you an actual ZapfDingbats compatible font like D050000L.otf and while at it please complain to your distro to make that a very very very very recommended package for okular.
(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #9) > Roboto is a terrible substitution for ZapfDingbats (which my quess is what's > being used for the dots). > > Install a package that gives you an actual ZapfDingbats compatible font like > D050000L.otf and while at it please complain to your distro to make that a > very very very very recommended package for okular. OK, after checking my packages I found some Zapfding fonts in texlive-zapfding: /usr/share/texmf/dvips/zapfding/config.uzd /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.afm /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/urw/zapfding/uzdr.afm /usr/share/texmf/fonts/map/dvips/zapfding/uzd.map /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.tfm /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/urw35vf/zapfding/uzdr.tfm /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfb /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfm /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/zapfding/uuzd.fd But no OTF fonts. I tried looking into other packages and I found D050000L.{afm,pfb} in ghostscript-fonts-std. But, again, not an OTF font. So I had to download and install it manually and, voila, now it works. However, I don't quite understand why none of the installed fonts from texlive-zapfding or ghostscript-fonts-std could be used to substitute it. Did I miss anything or is it bug? If so, what should I report it against?
Created attachment 139248 [details] works
(In reply to Oleksandr Ostrenko from comment #10) > (In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #9) > > Roboto is a terrible substitution for ZapfDingbats (which my quess is what's > > being used for the dots). > > > > Install a package that gives you an actual ZapfDingbats compatible font like > > D050000L.otf and while at it please complain to your distro to make that a > > very very very very recommended package for okular. > > OK, after checking my packages I found some Zapfding fonts in > texlive-zapfding: > > /usr/share/texmf/dvips/zapfding/config.uzd > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.afm > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/urw/zapfding/uzdr.afm > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/map/dvips/zapfding/uzd.map > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.tfm > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/urw35vf/zapfding/uzdr.tfm > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfb > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfm > /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/zapfding/uuzd.fd > > But no OTF fonts. I tried looking into other packages and I found > D050000L.{afm,pfb} in ghostscript-fonts-std. But, again, not an OTF font. So > I had to download and install it manually and, voila, now it works. > > However, I don't quite understand why none of the installed fonts from > texlive-zapfding or ghostscript-fonts-std could be used to substitute it. > Did I miss anything or is it bug? If so, what should I report it against? DejaVu Sans (dejavu-fonts package) should be enough. You can file a bug report against openSUSE package to include it as a dependence as proposed by Albert.
(In reply to Yuri Chornoivan from comment #12) > (In reply to Oleksandr Ostrenko from comment #10) > > (In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #9) > > > Roboto is a terrible substitution for ZapfDingbats (which my quess is what's > > > being used for the dots). > > > > > > Install a package that gives you an actual ZapfDingbats compatible font like > > > D050000L.otf and while at it please complain to your distro to make that a > > > very very very very recommended package for okular. > > > > OK, after checking my packages I found some Zapfding fonts in > > texlive-zapfding: > > > > /usr/share/texmf/dvips/zapfding/config.uzd > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.afm > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/urw/zapfding/uzdr.afm > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/map/dvips/zapfding/uzd.map > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/adobe/zapfding/pzdr.tfm > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/urw35vf/zapfding/uzdr.tfm > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfb > > /usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/urw/zapfding/uzdr.pfm > > /usr/share/texmf/tex/latex/zapfding/uuzd.fd > > > > But no OTF fonts. I tried looking into other packages and I found > > D050000L.{afm,pfb} in ghostscript-fonts-std. But, again, not an OTF font. So > > I had to download and install it manually and, voila, now it works. > > > > However, I don't quite understand why none of the installed fonts from > > texlive-zapfding or ghostscript-fonts-std could be used to substitute it. > > Did I miss anything or is it bug? If so, what should I report it against? > > DejaVu Sans (dejavu-fonts package) should be enough. You can file a bug > report against openSUSE package to include it as a dependence as proposed by > Albert. I am sorry, I am still a bit confused. I had all those fonts installed (dejavu-fonts, texlive-zapfding, ghostscript-fonts-std) and it still did not work, until I MANUALLY downloaded an OTF file for Zapfding from the web and installed it. I had the other fonts installed as afm & pfb files, but, apparently, they are not considered for rendering by okular. For instance, Roboto.ttf was choosen over D050000L.{afm,pfb}. Is this the expected behavior? Sorry if that is seems trivial, but I am a bit lost here.
Created attachment 139254 [details] Fonts that work Linux fontconfig subsystem is complex and fragile. It is hard to decide what to do in such cases. As a rule of thumb, you should install the substituted fonts. Or just embed fonts. https://hansjoerg.me/2018/02/15/font-embedding-for-latex-and-r-users/
(In reply to Yuri Chornoivan from comment #14) > Created attachment 139254 [details] > Fonts that work > > Linux fontconfig subsystem is complex and fragile. It is hard to decide what > to do in such cases. As a rule of thumb, you should install the substituted > fonts. Or just embed fonts. > > https://hansjoerg.me/2018/02/15/font-embedding-for-latex-and-r-users/ Ah, I see. Thank you for providing this link. So it's a "feature". Thanks to everybody in the thread for helping me hunt it down! It's been resolved for me.
Why wasn’t the <?> symbol rendered instead of the missing character? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specials_(Unicode_block) U+FFFD � REPLACEMENT CHARACTER used to replace an unknown, unrecognized, or unrepresentable character
(In reply to Yuri Chornoivan from comment #12) > DejaVu Sans (dejavu-fonts package) should be enough. You can file a bug > report against openSUSE package to include it as a dependence as proposed by > Albert. This is not correct. Dejavu is not a correct replacement for ZapfDingbats. ZapfDingbats is a special font where A is not rendered as an A but as the star of david, etc.
(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #17) > (In reply to Yuri Chornoivan from comment #12) > > DejaVu Sans (dejavu-fonts package) should be enough. You can file a bug > > report against openSUSE package to include it as a dependence as proposed by > > Albert. > > This is not correct. Dejavu is not a correct replacement for ZapfDingbats. > > ZapfDingbats is a special font where A is not rendered as an A but as the > star of david, etc. It can be proven (e.g. using FontForge) that DejaVu Sans is a good replacement of ZapfDingbats as it contains dingbats part and is common in the distributions. The screenshot above (Mageia 8, fontconfig 2.13.93) is additional proof of the fact that it can be used to render the test file. The only problem is the font precedence.