CJK broken in 2.9?

Help
2012-01-02
2012-10-17
  • As I mentioned in another topic, I was having trouble with 2.8's package
    maintenance and decided to just upgrade to 2.9 via complete de-install and
    fresh install.

    Once I did that, my UTF support for traditional Chinese fonts using the CJK
    package fails as PDFLaTeX can't find the font sources to build PK files from.
    (Why is it trying to build PK files instead of just building PostScript
    fonts?)

    Anyway, this used to work (or way back when I installed 2.8 I got it to work
    somehow) in 2.8, but googling around I found numerous pages saying that
    incomplete font support in the MiKTeX cjk packages was a known problem.
    However, the solutions I found keep assuming that the files used by MiKTeX are
    in different directories than where they appear to be in 2.9.

    Does anyone have updated information about how to get the cjk font support
    fully working in 2.9?
    I'm running on Windows 7 at the moment and would prefer to get it working
    there, but if the answer turns out to be that it works right in
    Linux/Unix/Mac, I can switch to those as well.

     
  • Bruce Rusk
    Bruce Rusk
    2012-01-30

    I've found that XeCJK (in XeLaTeX) works very nicely, and handles external
    fonts cleanly, so if you can switch to that it might help. In general, XeLaTeX
    handles Unicode matters more seamlessly that PDFLaTeX.

     
  • U_Fischer
    U_Fischer
    2012-01-31

    Why is it trying to build PK files instead of just building PostScript
    fonts?

    You can't "build" postscript fonts. Either they are there/are found or not. If
    pdftex doesn't find them it tries at the last resort to build pk-fonts.

    Besides this: You are not giving enouph informations. A description like "it
    fails" is useless. Make a small complete example that demonstrates your
    problem. (If possible one that doesn't use non-ascii-chars (even this is
    senseless in a real document, it makes testing easier)).

    Ulrike Fischer