After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 614749 - Option to cut off the white borders of pages (efficient use of screen space)
Option to cut off the white borders of pages (efficient use of screen space)
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 169676
Product: evince
Classification: Core
Component: general
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Evince Maintainers
Evince Maintainers
Depends on:
Reported: 2010-04-03 16:23 UTC by hilbertvandenbach
Modified: 2010-04-04 10:42 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Description hilbertvandenbach 2010-04-03 16:23:55 UTC
In many pdf files there are quite large white borders around the text. A user, in particular when he has a small screen, might not want to waste screen space for them. I would really like the following future in evince that the user could turn on optionally.

Namely, that evince would not show the full page, but only the part where there is text. In other words it would cut off the left, right, top, and bottom part of the page before showing it. 

It would be even greater if evince could recognize the page number, and would also (optionally) cut that off.

Note that with the current zoom futures this behaviour can not be simulated for two reasons: First of all, when a user zooms in to cut off the left and right border manually, the page is not auto centered (see also bug #614748). So, this requires (quite delicate) manual work for every pdf that is shown. Secondly, there is no way to cut off the top and bottom parts using the zoom futures.
Comment 1 Carlos Garcia Campos 2010-04-04 10:42:15 UTC
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 169676 ***