From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David De La Harpe Golden Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Monospace font bug? Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 06:55:27 +0100 Message-ID: <4902B4CF.5090503@harpegolden.net> References: <87fxmllas3.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> <49028D9F.9030505@harpegolden.net> <49029DC9.9050804@harpegolden.net> <87wsfxuvuc.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1224914145 19253 80.91.229.12 (25 Oct 2008 05:55:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 05:55:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 25 07:56:46 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ktc8k-0004LS-5B for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 07:56:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39866 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ktc7e-0004X0-EI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:55:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ktc7Z-0004UX-EN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:55:33 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ktc7Y-0004Tl-K8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:55:32 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45262 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ktc7Y-0004TS-BT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:55:32 -0400 Original-Received: from harpegolden.net ([65.99.215.13]:57585) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ktc7Y-0000wl-38 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 01:55:32 -0400 Original-Received: from [87.198.54.44] (87-198-54-44.ptr.magnet.ie [87.198.54.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "David De La Harpe Golden", Issuer "David De La Harpe Golden Personal CA rev 3" (verified OK)) by harpegolden.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F07668088; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 06:55:29 +0100 (IST) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081018) In-Reply-To: <87wsfxuvuc.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:104982 Archived-At: Chong Yidong wrote: > > That's an unfortunate choice of name. > Yes, yes it is. > Any suggestion about how to avoid matching to that font? > > No. but is it desirable to? If emacs says "monospace" to the OS, and the OS returns something usable (see below), should emacs second guess it? The distros with ttf-georgewilliams packages seem to be aware of the issue and are fixing it by removing or renaming the font in favour of the de-facto standard "monospace" virtual font name https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gw-fonts-ttf/+bug/95357/comments/6 Anwyay, while emacs on my display with george williams monospace doesn't look _wonderful_ - the font isn't hinted I guess, looks better at larger sizes - it is nowhere near as bad as bug 1219's rendering. (I'll send a screenshot offlist). If it were to be blacklisted very naively, I can even imagine someone who doesn't mind the non-dotted-zeros and with a hires display (so the hinting issues didn't matter) deciding they like it, and being perplexed when they tell emacs "monospace" and it doesn't work... Of course, it's being rendered by xft not core x in my case. But it certainly currently looks to me like bug 1219 could well be some aspect of core x's truetype font metric handling being buggy rather than the font or emacs for that matter being buggy. So _maybe_ blacklisting it from the core x font backend might be worthwhile (I for one just don't use core x font rendering, it's terrible even when working right), but the font doesn't seem to me to be a real problem when it's rendered by xft, and the problem is being treated as a bug by the distros anyway?