From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BC=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=BE=D0=B2?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#4895: 23.1; Incorrect font selected Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:15:33 +0300 Message-ID: <5f0660120911092215v48f00477l5f2c68855507ab4b@mail.gmail.com> References: Reply-To: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BC=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=BE=D0=B2?= , 4895@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1257834465 16726 80.91.229.12 (10 Nov 2009 06:27:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:27:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 4895@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com To: Kenichi Handa Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 10 07:27:37 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-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 1N7kCW-0006my-RV for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:27:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44710 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N7kCW-00045H-3M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N7kCO-000433-P9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:28 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N7kCJ-00042B-I4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:27 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36546 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N7kCJ-000428-CX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:23 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:35966) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N7kCI-0005j0-Ol for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:23 -0500 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nAA6RHxL017316; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:27:19 -0800 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id nAA6P5NV017010; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:25:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:25:05 -0800 X-Loop: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BC=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=BE=D0=B2?= Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs 2Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:25:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: followup 4895 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 4895-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B4895.125783375616343 (code B ref 4895); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:25:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 4895) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 10 Nov 2009 06:15:56 +0000 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 Bayes not run. spammytokens:Tokens not available. hammytokens:Tokens not available. Original-Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.24]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id nAA6FrH3016340 for <4895@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:15:55 -0800 Original-Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 25so376126eya.1 for <4895@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:15:53 -0800 (PST) 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 :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=b3S5jkZhpQJ+X8DbJMLijYT243ri6VqhURw/8d0ohEc=; b=P3YcJpiqEj56MSU/v3zNGTp4Jt8lNFnodpjBMl6XmWVX789UghBqNxcxifKu2ToXXh 9sHCvriAAu5FZIOoh8AdtLx6T9U4HdH95PPvNEDH/TcKGy1RrTFD1auqwypXmHNxg5mc /S+hgKWl5U6FCvQFoZk6b/jmd9XtsdG4r9w7s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=R5ZHRIHlhesC6DIXDN2GsNwr3lkIGcTy0FP9ZJpQi43gN2YH1OA1YRaxBwdUeiCGbj wbewDuji6hWRzXkjWVOcaIt3gL2xAYOzXvWknvtvEGiv0Nsd55PmsP4R1ZkhRwjTirj2 1/PCDAM3ot8wpJ1RJlflxLJtm0VX1MSiysQoQ= Original-Received: by 10.216.90.1 with SMTP id d1mr2839193wef.136.1257833753264; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:15:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:27:27 -0500 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:32507 Archived-At: Hello! 2009/11/10 Kenichi Handa : > This is because Emacs prefers a font whose registry matches > with `charset' text property. > > In the above case, the default fontset has this entry for > cyrillic: > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (cyrillic ,(font-spec :registry "iso10646-1" :script 'cyril= lic) > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (nil . "ISO8859-5") > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (nil . "microsoft-cp1251= ") > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (nil . "koi8-r")) > > and when you read a file with cp1251, the charset property > `cp1251' is put on the buffer text. =C2=A0Thus the font-selector > prefers a font whose registry is "microsoft-cp1251". > > If you prefer cyrillic characters to be displayed by the > default font, you can do this in .emacs: > > (set-fontset-font "fontset-default" 'cyrillic > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0(font-spec = :registry "iso10646-1" :script 'cyrillic)) > Thanks for the explanation. Do you think it's still valid not to prefer unicode fonts to fonts with specific registries? I believe the unicode is dominating by now, at least for european languages. Andrey Paramonov