On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 12:37:14 +0900 handa wrote: > In article <87po9irqej.fsf@gmx.net>, Stephen Berman writes: > >> I haven't yet tried a font specialized for Lao, but I did try Symbola, >> and with that the Lao HELLO example appears as it does in Emacs without >> m17n-lib and libotf (with one exeption, see below) -- though the font >> used to display the Lao is not Symbola but DejaVu Sans. Then I realized >> what the difference is: Symbola is a variable pitch font, while my >> default font is DejaVu Sans Mono (also the default with -Q). And >> indeed, using DejaVu Sans (not Mono) as the default font displays the >> Lao as in Emacs without m17n-lib and libotf (but in the latter Emacs >> it's the same display also with DejaVu Sans Mono) -- with the exception >> of the character LAO LETTER HO SUNG, which is composed with LAO TONE MAI >> THO, but in the display, the latter appears over the following >> character, while in the Emacs without m17n-lib and libotf it appears >> over the character it is composed with (which I assume is correct). The >> other three character compositions in the Lao example appear the same in >> Emacs both without and with m17n-lib and libotf -- but again, in the >> latter only with variable pitch DejaVu Sans. So this does seem to be a >> problem in the m17n-lib and/or libotf code. > > In my environment, Lao can be rendered correctly by Dejavu Sans Mono > (see the attached image). Please run Emacs as this, and show me the > printed log: > > % MDEBUG_DATABASE=1 MDEBUG_FLT=1 emacs Attached. In your screen shot the displays of the Kannada, Khmer and Malayalam examples are partly different from the displays in my Emacs: