Aaron Hill writes:
> On 2019-12-13 3:54 am, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Peter writes:
>>> A regular oddity is the message no glyph for U+92 in the .off file ?
>>> significant?
>> It means that in the given font there is no backslash. Text font
>> layout
>> of TeX fonts tends to be a bit weird but
> pango-font.cc emits the warning with %0X, so that U+ number is in
> hex.
BTW, I've now slightly adjusted the warning message in git to make
LilyPond emit 'U+0092' instead of 'U+92' – the 'U+' notation should
return at least four uppercase hex digits.
Werner
On 2019-12-13 3:54 am, David Kastrup wrote:
Peter writes:
A regular oddity is the message no glyph for U+92 in the .off file ?
significant?
It means that in the given font there is no backslash. Text font
layout
of TeX fonts tends to be a bit weird but nevertheless this seems
strange.
Please do not take discussions off the list without bothering to
announce it.
Resent, this time with list included.
Peter writes:
> Yes I did manually change using the Fresco snippet but only after the
> problem in order to put all the files on the current version number. I
> appreciate that
