Re: cvs emacs scales fonts to awfully big?

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 03.01.2009 um 02:51 schrieb Peter Tury:

> > > However, none of these affected Emacs: it still uses 11.8pt high  
> > > fonts
> > > (previously it was 12pt)!?
>
> I deduced these from `describe-face's result for 'default' face. It
> told: "Height: 118" (previously: 120). Doesn't this show the used font
> size? (After the customization mentioned earlier, now it tells:
> "Height: 79". This is fine for me.)

The XLFD has a pixel size and a point size. The latter is ten times  
the former.

> > The actual font used can be determined by typing C-u C-x = on some
> > character.
>
> It gives me (after the customization, i.e. when I have normal size
> fonts):
>         character: ( (40, #o50, #x28)
> preferred charset: ascii (ASCII (ISO646 IRV))
>        code point: 0x28
>            syntax: ()   which means: open, matches )
>          category: a:ASCII
> ASCII graphic characters 32-126 (ISO646 IRV:1983[4/0]) l:Latin r:Roman
> Japanese roman
>       buffer code: #x28
>         file code: #x28 (encoded by coding system undecided-unix)
>           display: by this font (glyph code)
>     xft:-unknown-DejaVu Sans Mono-normal-normal-normal-*-14-*-*-*-m-0-
> iso10646-1 (#x0B)

You can see that the font was selected via libXft.

> Does this mean 14pt size?

Yes! But (point) size in pixels.

> When starting by Emacs -Q (i.e. in case of awfully big characters) it
> gives:
>
>         character: a (97, #o141, #x61)
> preferred charset: ascii (ASCII (ISO646 IRV))
>        code point: 0x61
>            syntax: w    which means: word
>          category: a:ASCII
> ASCII graphic characters 32-126 (ISO646 IRV:1983[4/0]) l:Latin r:Roman
> Japanese roman
>       buffer code: #x61
>         file code: #x61 (encoded by coding system utf-8-unix)
>           display: by this font (glyph code)
>     xft:-unknown-DejaVu Sans Mono-normal-normal-normal-*-21-*-*-*-m-0-
> iso10646-1 (#x44)
> ...
>
> 21pt?

Yes, and obviously trying to accommodate the 16pt (or now 14pt?)  
default to the display's resolution. Notice that the resx and resy  
fields are unspecified, so any 75 DPI or 100 DPI font, whichever  
comes first, matches this specification.

Have you ever tried xfontsel?

> > xset -q
>
> Yes, 100dpi libraries are indeed before the 75dpi ones. Should I
> change somehow their order? How is this possible?

In your ~/.xinitrc or ~/.xsession file, whichever is used, you can  
insert/correct:

        xset fp= /path/1/,/path/2/,/path/3/
        xset fp rehash

See man xset. Usually one uses 'xset fp+ ...' or 'xset +fp ...',  
i.e., one appends or prepends local additional font path elements  
(directories) to the compile time default.


> > To me it looks as if GNU Emacs creates its startup fontset from
> > either an X resource Emacs*font
>
> I checked  xrdb -q | grep Emacs and it contains only colors (except
> what I set manually -- fontbackend). Should I check something else
> too?

It's your decision! The GNU Emacs info node has some documentation on  
X resources.

> Now I would like to know if it is a bug that normal working can be
> achieved only by some manual customizations?

It's not: it's a design decision. Maybe it has to be corrected for  
modern LCD screens. This could be done by choosing to report an Emacs  
bug (Help menu) and changing the subject of the eMail to the  
developers from bug report to something more appropriate.

> (In other words: I think Emacs should find the proper font sizes as  
> other applications find them by default.)


IMO it does! I let it use

	Emacs*font:     -*-lucidatypewriter-medium-r-*-*-10-*-*-*-m-*- 
iso10646-1

and

	    x:-b&h-lucidatypewriter-medium-r-normal-sans-10-100-75-75-m-60- 
iso8859-1

is used for an ASCII character (libXft on my Mac is from last  
millennium or elder and therefore unusable). If no X resource is  
defined and no font or fontset is set in *-frame-alist a default in C  
source code is used as last resort. This sounds quite rational.

--
Greetings

  Pete

One cannot live by television, video games, top ten CDs, and dumb  
movies alone.
                                – Amiri Baraka, 1999