[tex-live] TeX Live 2018 pretest problem with lualatex and Biolinum font

[Thomas Krennwallner]

Hi!

I have recently upgraded to texlive 2018 pretest from Debian
experimental.  My current document seems to look fine with lualatex,
except for bold sans serif text using Linux Biolinum O, which now uses a
bold italic sans serif variant instead after the upgrade.  Other fonts
appear to be fine, only Biolinum has issues with boldface text.

The following example creates reasonable output with xelatex. But if I
compile with lualatex, bold sans serif text seems to use
Linux Biolinum O Bold Oblique (LinBiolinumOBO)
instead of
Linux Biolinum O Bold (LinBiolinumOB).

--- 8< --- 8< ---
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\begin{document}
{\sffamily\fontspec{Linux Biolinum O} biolinum sffamily}

{\itshape\sffamily\fontspec{Linux Biolinum O} biolinum sffamily itshape}

{\bfseries\sffamily\fontspec{Linux Biolinum O} biolinum sffamily bfseries (uses oblique with lualatex)}

{\itshape\bfseries\sffamily\fontspec{Linux Biolinum O} biolinum sffamily bfseries itshape (ignores bfseries with xelatex)}
\end{document}
--- >8 --- >8 ---


Here is the output of pdffonts:

% xelatex bio.tex
This is XeTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-0.99999 (TeX Live 2018/Debian) (preloaded format=xelatex)
[...]

% pdffonts bio.pdf
name                                 type              encoding         emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- --- --- --- ---------
LFUSRL+LinBiolinumO-Identity-H       CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      5  0
ESTCNE+LinBiolinumOI-Identity-H      CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      7  0
AROGDP+LinBiolinumOB-Identity-H      CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      9  0
VGCWVC+LMRoman10-Regular-Identity-H  CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes     11  0


% lualatex bio.tex
This is LuaTeX, Version 1.07.0 (TeX Live 2018/Debian) 
[...]

% pdffonts bio.pdf
name                                 type              encoding         emb sub uni object ID
------------------------------------ ----------------- ---------------- --- --- --- ---------
YAQTMP+LinBiolinumO                  CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      4  0
FGULND+LinBiolinumOI                 CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      5  0
NIPUHB+LinBiolinumOBO                CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      6  0
JFRMQG+LMRoman10-Regular             CID Type 0C       Identity-H       yes yes yes      7  0


Note the difference at the third font line: xelatex uses bold
LinBiolinumOB, whereas lualatex uses bold oblique LinBiolinumOBO
instead.  Interestingly, xelatex ignores the boldface setting for
biolinum when I select an italic shape, which seems to be properly
approximated with lualatex using the oblique variant of biolinum.  But
lualatex should have used LinBiolinumOB for the non-italic boldface
text.


I have further noticed the following difference with Biolinum:

% for s in R RB RBO ; do otfinfo -i $(kpsewhich LinBiolinum_${s}.otf) | egrep '(Unique ID|Full name)' ; done
Full name:           Linux Biolinum O
Unique ID:           FontForge 2.0 : Linux Biolinum O : 30-11-2017
Full name:           Linux Biolinum O Bold
Unique ID:           FontForge 2.0 : Linux Biolinum O Bold : 30-11-2017
Full name:           Linux Biolinum O Bold Oblique
Unique ID:           FontForge 2.0 : Linux Biolinum O Bold Oblique : 30-10-2012

It seems that the regular (R) and the bold (RB) variant is from
30-11-2017, whereas the bold oblique (RBO) variant is from 30-10-2012.
But I'm not sure whether this difference is important.

Cheers,
TK