GNU bug report logs - #40558
Modular TexLive "Insufficient extension fonts" and duplicate fonts

Please note: This is a static page, with minimal formatting, updated once a day.
Click here to see this page with the latest information and nicer formatting.

Package: guix; Reported by: Jelle Licht <jlicht@HIDDEN>; dated Sat, 11 Apr 2020 16:16:02 UTC; Maintainer for guix is bug-guix@HIDDEN.

Message received at 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org:


Received: (at 40558) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 May 2020 10:48:12 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat May 09 06:48:12 2020
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46831 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1jXN1g-0005TR-Ho
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 06:48:12 -0400
Received: from m42-5.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.5]:60452)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <bounce+131be5.08547a-40558=debbugs.gnu.org@HIDDEN>)
 id 1jXN1b-0005T7-Ky
 for 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 06:48:11 -0400
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.wilsonb.com;
 q=dns/txt; 
 s=krs; t=1589021290; h=Content-Type: MIME-Version: Message-Id: From:
 To: Date: Sender; bh=/J3ttExroroRTL5txmpCxfy9UaU/YF2tXcuv+c1cC44=;
 b=vwE/Pgvx/JkHpdvhJrmY0vKTNSWcpEmYa37XTDl6Ij7jgO3CbrePtivgFm7MC9IzeVk8V0O9
 jfzecW0mNBH/HcJG2U0x2BTIVHxiL3F7ZWqKMT7eYwAaxSaWI+kI/tu3sJPhDIgSzLRGlSH/
 z2cMFrjCisPAXUR3DEMuXkBRQPFi6Ba54PoVv/X8t1ITxcIaNCIVMNEuD4YQL4JUJgX/lYBr
 jtsFjqJYbNxyMksIiA2+cqYescz+2u1g1jTb+zVQPLzZ8Ec2YYACoxMD8WDpUM3bSVSH4vYY
 6d8hX6x3+YnhF2HDoDAnsqjKm9KrSqO6wHy+k9BhsG4BnGjiBCrU3w==
X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.42.5
X-Mailgun-Sid: WyJkYzdiZCIsICI0MDU1OEBkZWJidWdzLmdudS5vcmciLCAiMDg1NDdhIl0=
Received: from wilsonb.com (wilsonb.com [104.199.203.42])
 by mxa.mailgun.org with ESMTP id 5eb68a5c.7f19b588e480-smtp-out-n02;
 Sat, 09 May 2020 10:47:56 -0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (KD111239200103.au-net.ne.jp [111.239.200.103])
 by wilsonb.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F373A1A75
 for <40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat,  9 May 2020 10:47:52 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wilsonb.com;
 s=201703; t=1589021273;
 bh=/J3ttExroroRTL5txmpCxfy9UaU/YF2tXcuv+c1cC44=;
 h=Date:To:From:From;
 b=GvBmUuXERpQpubBCDWys5XzPNnmHDAcqNk17qnXPhKqO42lKr57lI9BMtVR3rjElV
 SbmkwTPbnI6JA9XNJWd3G6dYIR2WB9uULD+DCTdUmVc7PV12yOZup4RuNjJAqPdqAJ
 sBWqd5nCRIu0W9EpwPiFKaMkkkFJyneQpCTedFMEV7gvmyMx1ullYE5vrotwvxMWTg
 j6Ta3rUk7jI2HE9Zx2Yu9WzjjlzPWlQGeKt9JfKkgp/uowENmih45o6amIA5OUtw/Z
 Bt1NNc/5eLfJ3SiX9NWJmXePSvK9De14Dlw7jsIQ5RenhEwYnh5le/fA6lvpBNBwFp
 Gz1MvRWcCDRXPZjkNYFiPNqIkLt9fbKIG4566p2bUCDa7LhI22g00wZgItSoZkJC3v
 JYQzuL6cOOQ2Jp2QWPn9IHJn0KaMWiQf+Shj17VEX3dzVXpDx74y7RQyV1XNDbdjVz
 pleXniz/cKNzFIiOvaJ4rJYNG2j4msEDALymiYql0AJI1mUhYjkuwOl7GyXdxP01m2
 oMdzN1UaPihBKSkZCIvWmVmqDTZLY1ja6ennVVagmGIBzlG+L58lMQCDvFaqZunQeX
 mQ5l6BR972/ddbtJWrYs1HDLemfvLLan9d9nX4uIdUNoopRJWS05eWFLELNYS5Wowp
 dvVTeN7n2lfmOg605ZhIz0tg=
Date: Sat, 09 May 2020 19:47:48 +0900
To: 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
From: elaexuotee@HIDDEN
Message-Id: <27M6ZG86RAW9I.2JWF3V3MICGED@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: mblaze/0.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="----_=_7679f21315166a4d5eb3800f_=_"
X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
 has NOT identified this incoming email as spam.  The original
 message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 Content preview: I encountered a similar issue while trying to package
 something
 with a texlive-union input. Tracking down the issue has killed way too many
 hours. FWIW, the `working.tex' minimal example is also giving me similar
 problems: 
 Content analysis details:   (2.0 points, 10.0 required)
 pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED          ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was
 blocked.  See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
 for more information. [URIs: gnu.org]
 -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE     RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 no trust [69.72.42.5 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3      RBL: Good reputation (+3)
 [69.72.42.5 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE          SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
 1.8 MISSING_SUBJECT        Missing Subject: header
 0.2 NO_SUBJECT             Extra score for no subject
 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL      Mailspike good senders
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 40558
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)

This is a multipart message in MIME format.

------_=_7679f21315166a4d5eb3800f_=_
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_468d5bec01c7be3850578313_=_"

This is a multipart message in MIME format.

------_=_468d5bec01c7be3850578313_=_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I encountered a similar issue while trying to package something with a texl=
ive-union input. Tracking down the issue has killed way too many hours.

FWIW, the `working.tex' minimal example is also giving me similar problems:=


    $ guix describe
    Generation 28    5=E6=9C=88 07 2020 01:10:02   (current)
      guix bed695a
        repository URL: https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git
        branch: master
        commit: bed695aa94cd85800ec2c6296fb2d13e7ac29133
    $ guix environment --pure -e '((@ (gnu packages tex) texlive-union) `(,=
(@ (gnu packages tex) texlive-amsfonts)))'
    $ pdflatex working
    ...
    ! Math formula deleted: Insufficient symbol fonts.
    \)  ->\relax \ifmmode \ifinner $
                                    \else \@badmath \fi \else \@badmath \fi=

    l.4 Hello! \(y =3D x^2\)
    ...

With the patch to texlive-amsfonts the above typesets just fine; however, m=
etafont ends up generating cmmi10.657pk and cmr10.657pk font files. Is this=
 expected? Typsetting it from the texlive installation of my foreign distro=
 doesn't call out to metafont at all.

------_=_468d5bec01c7be3850578313_=_--

------_=_7679f21315166a4d5eb3800f_=_
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iI0EABYIADUWIQQ7FdZn/PDWvxE6cmR2pStZ7i7CgQUCXraKTRccZWxhZXh1b3Rl
ZUB3aWxzb25iLmNvbQAKCRB2pStZ7i7CgSK8AQDZh9C4jVB9AhH4uBCVjSTPYAjL
Vs9zE7z5ttwbr2M0LgEA9fTBLAXPMDxYAj/83y/e+/jFuJL/v3txs64+77kQdgk=
=1v6d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

------_=_7679f21315166a4d5eb3800f_=_--




Information forwarded to bug-guix@HIDDEN:
bug#40558; Package guix. Full text available.

Message received at 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org:


Received: (at 40558) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Apr 2020 19:31:38 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Apr 20 15:31:38 2020
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48433 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1jQc8o-0004I6-1h
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:31:38 -0400
Received: from mail1.fsfe.org ([217.69.89.151]:48002)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <jlicht@HIDDEN>) id 1jQc8j-0004Hr-5R
 for 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:31:35 -0400
From: Jelle Licht <jlicht@HIDDEN>
To: 40558 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#40558: Modular TexLive "Insufficient extension fonts" and
 duplicate fonts
In-Reply-To: <874ktqxalv.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <874ktqxalv.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:31:30 +0200
Message-ID: <87h7xenect.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 40558
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------)


Jelle Licht <jlicht@HIDDEN> writes:

> The eror message is:
> " ! Math formula deleted: Insufficient extension fonts."
[snip]
> AFAIK, and from looking at the full (and correctly working)
> texlive-texmf build, the cmex7.tfm in `euler' is not correctly build.
> My best guess is that this happens because cmex has both a mf file and a
> afm file in `guix build --source texlive-amsfonts'. The one 'built'
> using afm2tfm seems to be broken and/or not matching other metadata
> generated, as given by this example.


I have found a workaround for my immediate problem, but I'm not nearly
enough of a tex guru to foresee any issues my changes might cause.

After some trial and error that took longer than I'm willing to admit, I
have the following snippet:
 
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
diff --git a/gnu/packages/tex.scm b/gnu/packages/tex.scm
index cd461314b5..363c7a318c 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/tex.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/tex.scm
@@ -1108,7 +1108,7 @@ Taco Hoekwater.")
                  ;; convert the afm files instead.
                  (let ((build (string-append (getcwd) "/build-fonts/euler")))
                    (mkdir build)
-                   (with-directory-excursion "fonts/afm/public/amsfonts/"
+                   (with-directory-excursion "fonts/afm/public/amsfonts/euler"
                      (for-each (lambda (font)
                                  (format #t "converting afm font ~a\n" (basename font ".afm"))
                                  (invoke "afm2tfm" font
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

With this patch applied, I can make use of the modular texlive system
from the comfort of Emacs + org. It could be that there are other 'ghost
fonts' haunting up the place. 

The following...
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
guix refresh -l texlive-amsfonts
Building the following 1438 packages would ensure 3202 dependent packages are rebuilt
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

makes me think this is very much a disruptive change. I'm not in a hurry
to get this upstreamed, but if anyone could reproduce the problem (and
my fix...), I would be more confident in pushing it.

- Jelle





Information forwarded to bug-guix@HIDDEN:
bug#40558; Package guix. Full text available.

Message received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org:


Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Apr 2020 16:15:17 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Apr 11 12:15:17 2020
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57015 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1jNImr-0005VV-6u
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:15:17 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:32944)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <jlicht@HIDDEN>) id 1jNImq-0005UH-4J
 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:15:16 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49735)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <jlicht@HIDDEN>) id 1jNImo-0008P7-OF
 for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:15:15 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <jlicht@HIDDEN>) id 1jNImn-0005PY-C2
 for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:15:14 -0400
Received: from mail1.fsfe.org ([217.69.89.151]:43048)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <jlicht@HIDDEN>) id 1jNImn-0005LQ-0W
 for bug-guix@HIDDEN; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 12:15:13 -0400
From: Jelle Licht <jlicht@HIDDEN>
To: bug-guix@HIDDEN
Subject: Modular TexLive "Insufficient extension fonts" and duplicate fonts
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 18:15:08 +0200
Message-ID: <874ktqxalv.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
 [fuzzy]
X-Received-From: 217.69.89.151
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain

I think I found a bug in our amsfonts texlive package. I will describe
my journey in finding this bug, as I still do not have clear picture
on the why/when/what is going on. I think I also saw several other
people running into this issue the last few months, so either way I am
happy to have found something reproducible that at least demonstrates
that I am sane :).

The eror message is:
" ! Math formula deleted: Insufficient extension fonts."

If you, like me, want to use Emacs' org-mode capabilities and export to
pdf using latex, by default you will generate an intermediate .tex file
that uses the ulem package. Using this package leads to the
aforementioned error message.

(Skip everything after this if you do not care about my descent into madness)

I used a profile containing the following (relevant) texlive packages:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
texlive-base	
texlive-latex-preview	
texlive-latex-base	
texlive-latexconfig	
texlive-fonts-ec	
texlive-latex-oberdiek	
texlive-latex-wrapfig	
texlive-generic-ulem	
texlive-latex-capt-of	
texlive-latex-hyperref
texlive-amsfonts	
texlive-fontinst	
texlive-metafont-base	
texlive-unicode-data	
texlive-pstool	
texlive-cm	
texlive-cm-super	
texlive-latex-amscls	
texlive-fonts-latex	
texlive-latex-amsmath	
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---


I ran both `strace pdflatex working 2> working-strace.log' and `strace
pdflatex broken 2> broken-strace.log' See the attached `working.tex'
and `broken.tex' for tiny examples that demonstrate this.

The relevant part of the diff between straces:

* Working:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
access("/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/cmex7.tfm", R_OK) = 0
stat("/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/cmex7.tfm", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=940, ...}) = 0
openat(AT_FDCWD, "/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/cmex7.tfm", O_RDONLY) = 6
fstat(6, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=940, ...}) = 0
read(6, "\0\353\0\2\0\0\0\177\0#\0\6\0\16\0\3\0\0\0\0\0\34\0\r\27#\260\255\0p\0\0"..., 4096) = 940
close(6)                                = 0
openat(AT_FDCWD, "working.pdf", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC, 0666) = 6
write(1, " [1", 3)                      = 3
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

* Broken:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
access("/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/euler/cmex7.tfm", R_OK) = 0
stat("/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/euler/cmex7.tfm", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=1312, ...}) = 0
openat(AT_FDCWD, "/home/jlicht/.guix-profile/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/euler/cmex7.tfm", O_RDONLY) = 6
fstat(6, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0444, st_size=1312, ...}) = 0
read(6, "\1H\0\21\0\0\0\332\0*\0\20\0\20\0\6\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\6d\235jM\0\240\0\0"..., 4096) = 1312
close(6)                                = 0
write(1, "\n", 1)                       = 1
write(1, "! Math formula deleted: Insuffic"..., 54) = 54
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

We see that a different file is used when resolving the same font!
Furthermore, one of these fonts is a totally different size than the
other.


If we run: `guix build --check texlive-amsfonts | grep cmex7', we see:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Font metrics written on /tmp/guix-build-texlive-amsfonts-49435.drv-0/source/build-fonts/cmex7.tfm.
Output written on /tmp/guix-build-texlive-amsfonts-49435.drv-0/source/build-fonts/cmex7.600gf (128 characters, 30684 bytes).
Transcript written on /tmp/guix-build-texlive-amsfonts-49435.drv-0/source/build-fonts/cmex7.log.
converting afm font cmex7
cmex7 CMEX7
`build-fonts/cmex7.600gf' -> `/gnu/store/hrxlw7s1d8q0z5kipizjr7ib49bw4hjp-texlive-amsfonts-49435/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/cmex7.600gf'
`build-fonts/cmex7.tfm' -> `/gnu/store/hrxlw7s1d8q0z5kipizjr7ib49bw4hjp-texlive-amsfonts-49435/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/cmex7.tfm'
`build-fonts/euler/cmex7.tfm' -> `/gnu/store/hrxlw7s1d8q0z5kipizjr7ib49bw4hjp-texlive-amsfonts-49435/share/texmf-dist/fonts/tfm/public/amsfonts/euler/cmex7.tfm'
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

AFAIK, and from looking at the full (and correctly working)
texlive-texmf build, the cmex7.tfm in `euler' is not correctly build.
My best guess is that this happens because cmex has both a mf file and a
afm file in `guix build --source texlive-amsfonts'. The one 'built'
using afm2tfm seems to be broken and/or not matching other metadata
generated, as given by this example.

Thanks for reading along, I hope we will find a solution to this, as
non-modular texlive is simply the worst :).

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/x-tex
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=working.tex
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

XGRvY3VtZW50Y2xhc3NbMTFwdF17YXJ0aWNsZX0KXHVzZXBhY2thZ2V7YW1zbWF0aH0KXGJlZ2lu
e2RvY3VtZW50fQpIZWxsbyEgXCh5ID0geF4yXCkKXGVuZHtkb2N1bWVudH0K
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/x-tex
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=broken.tex
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

XGRvY3VtZW50Y2xhc3NbMTFwdF17YXJ0aWNsZX0KXHVzZXBhY2thZ2V7YW1zbWF0aH0KXHVzZXBh
Y2thZ2V7dWxlbX0KXGJlZ2lue2RvY3VtZW50fQpIZWxsbyEgXCh5ID0geF4yXCkKXGVuZHtkb2N1
bWVudH0K
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain


 - Jelle

--=-=-=--




Acknowledgement sent to Jelle Licht <jlicht@HIDDEN>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guix@HIDDEN. Full text available.
Report forwarded to bug-guix@HIDDEN:
bug#40558; Package guix. Full text available.
Please note: This is a static page, with minimal formatting, updated once a day.
Click here to see this page with the latest information and nicer formatting.
Last modified: Sat, 9 May 2020 11:00:02 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.