# Cannot typeset cyrillic text in italics and bold at the same time using the LinuxLibertine font

I cannot tell if the following is a bug in the LinuxLibertine OTF files or if it is a bug in XeLaTeX (or both?). The problem is: when I try to typeset cyrillic text in italic and bold, the glyphs appearantly cannot be found in LinuxLibertine.

I have tried this with * my uptodate Arch Linux running TeXLive 2013, using the libertine package from my distribution, * the same TeXLive with freshly downloaded OTF files from the LinuxLibertine project, * a vanilla TeXLive 2014 as installed from tug.org together with the original Libertine OTF files.

Here is a minimal working example (expecting the OTF files in the current working directory; they can be downloaded from https://sourceforge.net/projects/linuxlibertine/files/linuxlibertine/5.3.0/):

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\begin{document}
\setmainfont[Path              = /path/to/linuxlibertine/,
Extension         = .otf,
BoldFont          = LinLibertine_RB,
ItalicFont        = LinLibertine_RI,
BoldItalicFont    = LinLibertine_RBI
]{LinLibertine_R}
\raggedright
Regular: положим\\
Bold: \textbf{положим}\\
Italic: \textit{положим}\\
Bold+Italic: \textit{\textbf{положим}}
\end{document}


The OTF files come straight out of LinLibertineOTF_5.3.0_2012_07_02.tgz. This is XeTeX 3.1415926-2.5-0.9999.3-2014042815 (TeX Live 2013/Arch Linux). In the last line (Bold+Italic), for each cyrillic glyph I see something like a crossed out rectangle in the resulting PDF file. (When I use LuaLatex I see nothing where the Bold+Italic glyphs should appear.)

As I said, I cannot tell if this is a bug in LinuxLibertine or in XeTeX. I would be happy about any pointers/workarounds, as I wish to have this fixed soon.

• Welcome to TeX.SX! Usually, we don't put a greeting or a “thank you” in our posts. While this might seem strange at first, it is not a sign of lack of politeness, but rather part of our trying to keep everything very concise. Accepting and upvoting answers is the preferred way here to say “thank you” to users who helped you. – Adam Liter Jul 2 '14 at 22:21

Apparently Linux Libertine lacks the Cyrillic alphabet in the bold italic font, but it has it in the semibold italic font. So a workaround is to use semibold instead of bold:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\begin{document}
\setmainfont[
Path              = /usr/local/texlive/2014/texmf-dist/fonts/opentype/public/libertine/,
Extension         = .otf,
BoldFont          = LinLibertine_RZ,
ItalicFont        = LinLibertine_RI,
BoldItalicFont    = LinLibertine_RZI,
]{LinLibertine_R}
\raggedright
Regular: положим\\
Bold: \textbf{положим}\\
Italic: \textit{положим}\\
Bold+Italic: \textit{\textbf{положим}}
\end{document}


## Update

Things have changed; with TeX Live 2017, the following document shows bold italic Cyrillic with no special setup. I also added the same with Libertinus Serif (of course, the \setmainfont declaration should be given just once, with the preferred font).

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setmainfont{Linux Libertine O}

\begin{document}

\raggedright

Regular: положим\\
Bold: \textbf{положим}\\
Italic: \textit{положим}\\
Bold+Italic: \textit{\textbf{положим}}

\setmainfont{Libertinus Serif}

Regular: положим\\
Bold: \textbf{положим}\\
Italic: \textit{положим}\\
Bold+Italic: \textit{\textbf{положим}}

\end{document}


Stefan Peev added real Bold Italic Cyrillics to Libertinus Serif. So the latest version has them. But mind that Semibold Italic is still buggy placeholders (as in this answer)

So you either shoud make sure that semibolds are not used or use Linus Libertini made specifically for this purpose (that is simply a renamed Libertinus Serif without semibolds).

• So how would you do this in LaTeX? What do you mean by a 'fall back font' in LaTeX? – cfr Feb 7 '18 at 4:44
• Actually, Linux Libertine (and the derivative Libertinus Serif ) are not stylistically equivalent to to Times New Roman. Liberation Serif is a substitute for TNR, I believe. The Libertine/us fonts have a more book-like shape, especially for the lowercase letters, so they are better suited to being an alternative to (very roughly) Garamond-style fonts. As for "fall back font," that would be done using the kind of code shown in the accepted answer. – user139954 Feb 7 '18 at 5:13
• @RobtAll I agree. I meant substitutes in metrical sense not stilistical (at least partial metrical compatibility). – Peter Zagubisalo Feb 7 '18 at 5:31
• @cfr I guess the simplest way in LaTeX would be swap the whole italics and bold-italics (latin also) from PT Astra Serif (in this case you can use the accepted answer). Or you can fine tune fallback manually. See this question for details. – Peter Zagubisalo Feb 7 '18 at 9:39
• @RobtAll That's not defining a 'fall back font' in LaTeX's or TeX's sense. (Unless you mean that loading fontspec does this, by setting it to LM rather than CM and, of course, for a different encoding.) – cfr Feb 7 '18 at 16:34