Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?

[Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>]

>>>>> "Ilya" == Ilya Zakharevich <address@hidden> writes:
> It looks like pointing-fingers was not dead-on-the-target; while Emacs
> is faulty, the principal blame should go to xrus-1251 and (allegedly)
> Netscape.  An excerpt from
>   http://www.siber.org/sib/russify/x-windows/#win-fonts
>    Yes, now you can have CP-1251 fonts on your X Window system.
>    We had to put them under the iso8859-5 because buggy Netscape would
>    not allow these fonts to work under official CP-1251 name.
> So what I see may be a very widespread situation.  Emacs can easily
> detect that the font *is not* a iso8859-5 font (since iso8859-5 has
> very few characters, and cp1251 has many).  At least it could have
> given a warning...

It could also look at the CHARSET_REGISTRY and CHARSET_ENCODING property
of the font (rather than assuming it's the same as in the fontname) ?

BTW, I agree that the fontset management could be made simpler (I think
it's not just a question of the doc being dense or incomplete).
Especially in your case, there should be some way to say something like:

   (fontset-prefer-font 'cyrillic-iso8859-5 "-etl-fixed-*-iso8859-5")


-- Stefan