Re: slang, boot-floppies, and wide character support
Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <edmundo@rano.org> writes:
> Please note that the patched slang1 is not binary compatible with the
> unpatched slang1. Making it binary compatible would be a horrible hack
> as the slang API exposes the internal representation of the contents
> of a screen cell as a 32-bit word.
>
> I have no idea whether the current patched slang is usable for
> Japanese; I have only used it for UTF-8. However, there's a good
> chance it might work for Japanese encodings. With glibc-2.2's wide
> character support it is possible to use the same code for UTF-8 as for
> Japanese character encodings. So it would nice if someone Japanese
> could try it or have a look.
Its sounding more and more like we should probably use slang1-ja...?
> If we could patch slang1 so that it works with glibc-2.2 in UTF-8 or
> CJK encodings, but isn't binary-compatible with the unpatched slang1,
> would that be an acceptable solution for boot-floppies?
Well, one thing you have to understand, whatever patching we do should
be available in a Debian package. That is to say, I don't want to be
dragging around diffs. I need these changes to propogate into the
packages themselves.
You seem to be avoiding the question here -- patch slang1, use
slang1-ja, or make a new slang1-wide package with these patches?
> Do you have a check list of the programs that will be linked against
> slang in boot-floppies?
No, sorry.
> I don't know what's happening about slang2, but I assume it won't be
> ready in time for Woody. (There are parts of the slang API which I
> think should be redesigned to cope better with combining characters -
> needed in Thai, for example. We really need John Davis to contribute
> to updating the API for slang2.)
I would presume it won't be ready.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onshore.com.....<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>
Reply to: