The useful info that doesn’t already exist a dozen times on the web is the info you can’t auto-generate.

I don't know how to find the ideal font for the missing glyph on my environment which is BSD.

Using the `unicode' command from plan9userspace, for example

   unicode 2ff0-2fff

the last three symbols are shown inside emacs as squares with the four hex values inside.

Typing in the search field `2fff' finds `no match found'.

Good catch — I just pushed an update based on this.

The symbols search now supports code-point lookup, so you can search by:

U+2FFF

0x2FFF

plain hex (2fff, 4–6 digits)

This makes it possible to jump straight to a symbol page even when the glyph doesn’t render locally and you only have the code point (like the Emacs/BSD case you described).

One limitation to note: some symbols aren’t covered by common or default system fonts, so they may still appear as tofu boxes depending on the font stack. That’s a font coverage issue rather than Unicode itself.

Appreciate you calling this out — this was exactly the kind of workflow gap I wanted to catch.

Maybe you could use unifont glyphs (drawn as SVGs?) as fallback?