Terminal command for app execution

Where can I find the terminal command needed to execute

  • adobe-reader-9.5.5

There are several ways, but I think the easiest is the web-based search.

Once you find the package you want, if you simply want to quickly use it you can run nix-shell -p adobe-reader. Then it will be available in your shell (until you exit that shell).

Hello @austin
I set it up in a FHS env but executing adobe-reader does not start adobe-reader
(same for nix-shell -p adobe-reader)

there is no adobe nor Adobe

the command is acroread


still I would be interested to get to know where that can be found “fast and obvious” …

btw: the app is not useful in the current state
e.g. the format:

in a pdf viewer it looks like:

but the pdf-file was created in Adobe

maybe the font expected by the reader is not available on your system? or was the pdf made with embedded fonts?

“all” other read don’t have any issues with it … (some fonts which are fine are there)

the issue is that while all other reader show the same font - in Adobe reader there are two different fonts used (the fonts on the system are irrelevant)

If there are no embedded fonts in the PDF itself then the system installed fonts are very much relevant.

You can check which fonts are embedded with pdffonts:

nix-shell -p poppler_utils
pdffonts my.pdf

I typically run ls $(nix-build -A package)/bin.

Adobe Reader might be bundling some fonts which other readers do not have (https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/90705). But it is really impossible without more details – what other readers have you tried and what fonts the PDF uses.

1 Like

normal displayed font with

Version 21.12.1


Foxit Reader

Master PDF Editor
Build 5.8.20, 64 bit

issues with


Version 4.03

yes, there are some fonts, e.g.
Config Error: No display font for 'Courier'

Courier is a non-redistributable font by Adobe. It’s no wonder it’s used, as it’s very common in the Microsoft world, but it’s not (legally) possible to make it available through a Linux distro. I think the Liberation fonts have a replacement for it, and it may even be automatically loaded.

That isn’t the font that’s missing in this case though, it looks different from the one used in your image. If you don’t give us the full list we can’t help you figure out how to install them all :wink:

It’s 2022 and one of most common fonts are still ‘non-redistributable’

I’m swear i’m going to have a Linus nvdia moment soon … Adobe… I nearly forgave you for flash security…but this and your recent cash grab on licensing…

If they could patent individual atoms , they would

If so, that in the example above the text “-Group” is in an adobe font

  • how does other pdf readers handle this text/font correctly (and all the same as displayed resulting font)?

Hard to know without seeing what fonts are actually in use. Adobe bundle their own fonts, so it’s possible that this is a version without that bundled font, and that it then fails to fall back correctly to the similar-looking system font all the other tools are using?

Missing base-14 / base-35 PDF glyphs in clients is a fairly common issue. e.g. Evince usually fails to render Asian glyphs.

Adobe’s Acrobat Reader has the originals but the license seems limited to using them with Reader. MuPDF tarballs are pre-pacakged with freely available substitutes (identical dimensions and similar designs) that should have full coverage of all the glyphs (droid, han, noto, sil and urw). I believe ghostscript carries the same or similar fonts.

Anyhow, whether we like it or not, they’re part of the PDF specs so anything rendering or producing PDFs should at least have the substitutes as a dependency.