Re: A funny bug in Emacs Unicode2/xft branch

[Kenichi Handa]

In article <address@hidden>, Leo <address@hidden> writes:

> Thank you. Could you give me a test case? I use "‐", but it has bold
> face even without the new fontset.c. So I can't see which bug it has
> fixed.

Ah, it depends on which font you have.  By default,
emacs-unicode has these as fallback fonts (FAMILY
. REGISTRY):

  (nil . "gb2312.1980")
  (nil . "gbk-0")
  (nil . "gb18030")
  (nil . "jisx0208")
  (nil . "ksc5601.1987")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-1")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-2")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-3")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-4")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-5")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-6")
  (nil . "CNS11643.1992-7")
  (nil . "big5")
  (nil . "jisx0213.2000-1")
  (nil . "jisx0213.2004-1")
  (nil . "jisx0212"))
  (nil . "iso10646-1")
  ("gnu-unifont" . "iso10646-1")
  ("mutt-clearlyu" . "iso10646-1")

The previous bug was that when you have gnu-unifont (which
has a glyph for "‐"), that font is used instead of bold
version of "DejaVu LGC Sans Mono".  But, it seems that you
don't have gnu-unifont.  If you have any of GB/JIS/KSC/BIG5
fonts, I think you can confirm that bug by the character
U+2190 (LEFTWARDS ARROW).

> I am still seeing square box for bold version of "─" with the new
> fontset.c.

Sorry, that is another bug which was not yet completely
fixed by the fontset.c I sent.  I'm now working on it.

---
Kenichi Handa
address@hidden