I am not able to find the bold variant of
cmex10 font in Type 1 format. Really it is missing in all common TeX distributions? I know that this variant was not included in Knuth's Computer Modern family. Thus there are no MF sources originally made by Knuth. But there is a modified MF source
cmexb10.mf by Sami Sozuer (August 10 1994). Next, there were many projects to convert MF sources (specially CM) to Type1. But
cmexb10.mf was never converted. Is it true?
What does the macro package (such as LaTeX) when a short math formula have to be typeset in Computer Modern in title (i.e. in boldface, the
\int symbol is used here, for example)? I suppose LaTeX without unicode support and with outline fonts in output (pdfLaTeX based on pdftex with PDF output). The
\int symbol is typeset from what font in such case? I mean that it is very common situation thus somebody have solved it.
Edit: Thank for the answer, but it is a response only to one part of my question: OK LaTeX doesn't solve the bold cmex by its default macros, the
\DeclareFontShape must be used directly. The result is bitmap font which uses the
cmexb10.mf file. But here is the second part of my question: Is is possible to find this type of font in next projects with Type1 CM fonts? I mean LM fonts, CMsuper etc... I belive that the authors of such font projects didn't repeat the same mistake as Knuth: to miss the bold variant of one of the basic four math-family fonts (O=cm, 1=cmi, 2=cmsy, 3=cmex). But I am not able to find it.
The solution with the cmexb10 bitmap fonts is very poor: the bitmap fonts are commonly unacceptable in PDF and the font generation process must be started during TeX run. This may bring a trouble, for example in web based TeX distributions where no forked processes from TeX are permitted.