X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject
	:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=b3M/QlVJwGj6tJw2
	GI4dXNijVN0pYrhwYtiFwyQ0WcTN1bUuat6tAjIpmhv98TFvtUPwiIfe4mBrBp29
	RQBxVcouIDqPQPi2aDJyqhEZ8nEJ8Xfom9WqjMZsz4jY6UoX4nUlf0QCjCTq4FBD
	O9uyX9dEiiJ4zOsjhXupaz3wroc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject
	:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=AM9kl91iXKmSNyknYwhgzm
	QNaJU=; b=oSIdI5Cnndq3vYKzB7xlES3Fmn9XR/2RM98GKw0QgYQmvwiA4bOGxl
	ndeKpl9iNc4b7N5CuhWae2PiuQWxvBj3Av73zTyDOuwoFaG8pTZHlGbgWOzYkmUr
	qhHoPO0IQM7rjD2mn+BMbAjguO5F8FCsrk7L2+YnzFA59Xc8xMM7E=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_THEBAT,LIKELY_SPAM_SUBJECT,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: smtpback.ht-systems.ru
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:30:43 +0400
From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <1983918876.20140911163043@yandex.ru>
To: Sebastien Vauban <sva-news AT mygooglest DOT com>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Font support of UTF-8 chars differ between w32 Emacs and Cygwin Emacs
In-Reply-To: <867g1atq2j.fsf@somewhere.org>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Greetings, Sebastien Vauban!

>>> The problem would be with Cygwin in general, then, if not limited to
>>> Emacs.
>>>
>>> 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
> font)?

Because of different substitution mechanics.


--
WBR,
Andrey Repin (anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru) 11.09.2014, <16:30>

Sorry for my terrible english...


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple