This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Font support of UTF-8 chars differ between w32 Emacs and Cygwin Emacs
- From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon at yandex dot ru>
- To: Sebastien Vauban <sva-news at mygooglest dot com>, cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:30:43 +0400
- Subject: Re: Font support of UTF-8 chars differ between w32 Emacs and Cygwin Emacs
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <868um0dgfp dot fsf at somewhere dot org> <54108F3C dot 5010103 at cornell dot edu> <86a966bn5v dot fsf at somewhere dot org> <87bnqmy0b4 dot fsf at Rainer dot invalid> <867g1atq2j dot fsf at somewhere dot org>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
Greetings, Sebastien Vauban!
>>> The problem would be with Cygwin in general, then, if not limited to
>>> But why the same fonts (Consolas, Lucida Console) don't display the same
>>> range of characters in both worlds?
>> You seem to assume that those fonts define that particular glyph.
> Yes, I was.
>> Both fonts you use as an example exist in multiple versions with
>> differing UTF-8 support. If they don't have that glyph (which is
>> likely, given the results you report), then Emacs would try to get it
>> from another font with the same dimensions (I don't know if mintty
>> does font substitution and if so, how) and the results very much
>> depend on the font maps used.
> I didn't know about that mechanism. But, then, the question is: why does
> Windows Emacs find a substitution, and not Cygwin Emacs (for the same
Because of different substitution mechanics.
Andrey Repin (email@example.com) 11.09.2014, <16:30>
Sorry for my terrible english...
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple