From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#19889: bug#22207: emacs-25 mishandles info code text on Fedora 23 Date: Sat, 07 May 2016 10:01:30 +0300 Message-ID: <8360uqfj1x.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56744F95.20307@cs.ucla.edu> <951925e4-e3ed-0367-721a-7241546f4013@cs.ucla.edu> <3u37pwfb2n.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <838tznhe9v.fsf@gnu.org> <9e47cf3a-8a15-f0d0-66db-4fffb7dcee38@cs.ucla.edu> <83inyrf6lw.fsf@gnu.org> <4201e7d9-9143-b02b-909d-8665d32d6eae@cs.ucla.edu> <83futvf1sz.fsf@gnu.org> <572D5AED.4070408@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1462604544 30439 80.91.229.3 (7 May 2016 07:02:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 May 2016 07:02:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 19889@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 07 09:02:12 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFf-0005RL-LS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 09:02:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33404 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFe-0004rq-QW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:02:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54411) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFa-0004mx-QC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:02:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFW-0005z9-GB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:02:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58134) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFW-0005yj-CK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:02:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1aywFW-0002Pm-2N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:02:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 07 May 2016 07:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 19889 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 19889-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B19889.14626044909239 (code B ref 19889); Sat, 07 May 2016 07:02:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 19889) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 May 2016 07:01:30 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42238 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1aywF0-0002Ox-2O for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:01:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35154) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1aywEx-0002Oj-FC for 19889@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:01:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywEq-0005sE-PQ for 19889@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:01:22 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33022) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aywEn-0005qW-45; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:01:17 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3664 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1aywEk-0001s7-L6; Sat, 07 May 2016 03:01:15 -0400 In-reply-to: <572D5AED.4070408@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Fri, 6 May 2016 20:03:09 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:117944 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Cc: rgm@gnu.org, 19889@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA > Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 20:03:09 -0700 > > I looked for a good source about this issue, and found someone who took a > circa-2012 census of Courier-like fonts on various web browsers and who > evaluated their looks when combined with non-Courier fonts. He writes that on > GNU/Linux platforms, the most common Courier fonts were Nimbus Mono L (98.2%) > and FreeMono (85.2%) but these fonts are a bit faint to be mixing with other > fonts, and that Courier 10 Pitch (85.0%) was a better choice. On OS X, he writes > that Courier Std (2.1%), Consolas (48.6%), and Courier (99.5%) are all good > choices, whereas Courier New (96.8%) is a bit faint. On MS-Windows, he says > Consolas (88.6%) and Courier (3.6%) are good choices, whereas FreeMono (0.6%) > and Courier New (99.8%) are a bit faint. As a result of all this, he suggests > the following order for Web use: "Courier 10 Pitch", "Courier Std", Consolas, > Courier, "TeX Gyre Cursor", TeXGyreCursor, "Nimbus Mono L", FreeMono, > "Courier New", monospace. See > . > > I doubt whether GNU Emacs should be defaulting to the non-free fonts in that > list(e.g., Consolas), given that the free fonts are so widely available.Courier > New is often disliked (it was digitized directly from the IBM Selectric golfball > which was at odds with how the Selectric actually worked). I don't know about > TeX Gyre Cursor, but it doesn't seem to be common on Fedora and Ubuntu anyway. > The other Courier-like fonts are close to the list I already proposed. Courier New is the default font on MS-Windows, so selecting it means we will have a face that is indistinguishable from the default: not good. Consolas comes with latest Windows versions out of the box, so I don't think there's a problem in having it on the list (we could do that only on Windows, if we don't want to recommend it on GNU/Linux). I don't understand what "monospace" means in that list. There's no such font, AFAIK, and all the other fonts are monospaced already, so what's behind that "monospace"? any other monospaced font? Other than that, how about using the outcome of that census, and request specific fonts it mentions, ordered by their quality, as the census recommends? I think this will yield better results than relying on family matches.