From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Availability of unicode glyphs on XP Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:22:00 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87y6s017am.fsf@siart.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1244651057 13878 80.91.229.12 (10 Jun 2009 16:24:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:24:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Uwe Siart Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 10 18:24:13 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MEQaz-0007bk-2O for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:24:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37750 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEQay-0001A3-DB for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:24:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEQYz-0006ON-22 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:22:09 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEQYt-00069S-O7 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:22:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57683 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEQYt-00068y-EZ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:22:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f217.google.com ([209.85.220.217]:33755) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MEQYt-0006l8-54 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:22:03 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17so1131396fxm.42 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:22:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+eyf4/uvITjINl+NJcTvgfU4rEtZelplxphrR6za+gQ=; b=kzlnyuoufapOBiswqV++pUUAnGepGXAT8W/LIO9mQCsusfCSMDpk+7IrGjImbiHT7u 1NELC5hQHgfYPMTevg58Btw7Uxriktdx/5XjuhOxrrnfxHcB4MXoHjR3OIfrt2Me+CtH jqf74yXrKnYldPOUbzBkhl04cAgN9cN5SN1BM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=WFfdOxsaodoL/GwJDbhwv6I2g22gsaMpdHl4GxTehrjoxz5ltyGVsIRe7HFg/Rx05O WtyLMF+A7I2TBF7W3+TbjohZxL37LHINQ0BqOzHb9UkXGR6fp8Q6fUiHxJCBEKCwmPr3 sWpFWmnLO/K48xeyFqwq9ugpj/Z6TdRxiC7GA= Original-Received: by 10.239.135.210 with SMTP id e18mr117845hbe.135.1244650920883; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:22:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87y6s017am.fsf@siart.de> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:65126 Archived-At: Please file a bug report with M-x report-emacs-bug 2009/6/10 Uwe Siart : > Hello, > > I'm using pretest Emacs 23.0.94.1 on both platforms W2k SP4 and XP SP3. > By > > ,---- > | M-x describe-input-method RET rfc1345 RET > `---- > > I get the full list of RFC1345 mnemonics. > > On W2k almost all glyphs (aside from a couple of octal sequences) are > displayed. On XP, however, I get a lot of blank boxes there, just as if > all those glyphs were not included in the font. > > Both Emacsen have identical settings and I did not make any changes to > the font variables ('fixed-pitch' points to Family:Monospace). I really > think this problem is due to the underlying platform or settings of the > same rather than an Emacs bug. > > But I have no clue where to begin my search. Can anyone give me some > direction how to track down this problem? Could the system fonts in W2k > be more complete than they are in XP? I can hardly believe. > > -- > Uwe >