> On Oct 2, 2017, at 10:06 PM, Gary Allen Vollink wrote:
>
> I noticed the following AFTER I sent the initial patch. I seriously
> doubt that this is new or unexpected behavior since the frc member
> unicodep is used to catch the individual rune that a font was opened
> for (and then eliminate
I used fontconfig 2.12.4.
I noticed the following AFTER I sent the initial patch. I seriously
doubt that this is new or unexpected behavior since the frc member
unicodep is used to catch the individual rune that a font was opened
for (and then eliminate that ONE rune from a new open on the next
c
On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 06:09:00PM -0400, Gary Allen Vollink wrote:
> Patch partially addresses this question from last month:
> https://lists.suckless.org/dev/1708/32111.html
>
> If a Glyph simply does not exist within the fonts of a system,
> fontconfig ends up returning the original default fon
Patch partially addresses this question from last month:
https://lists.suckless.org/dev/1708/32111.html
If a Glyph simply does not exist within the fonts of a system,
fontconfig ends up returning the original default font again. At this
point, 'st' happily opens it again, and holds a new frc arra
