[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: emacs 21.4, Chinese and utf-8

On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 08:28:40PM +0100, Stefan Müller wrote:
> Hi,
> I am a grammar developer and I started to work on Chinese. We use a 
> development system that needs utf-8 input. I managed to set up 
> everything for emacs 21.3. All I had to say was:
> (setq default-input-method \"chinese-py\")
> (set-default-coding-systems 'utf-8)
> And storing the files with Chinese characters in utf-8 and telling emacs 
> about it with the line:
> % -*- coding:utf-8 mode:trale-prolog-*-
> was sufficient.
> I put together a CD rom that is based on Knoppix, which is a debian 
> distribution. Debian uses emacs 21.4 and all I found out does not work 
> any longer:
> I can set the input-method to chinese-py by hand and type chinese 
> characters, but I cannot save them in utf-8. I can set this option for 
> saving the buffer, but if I try to safe the file emacs asks again and 
> utf-8 is not offered as an option.
> Do you have any ideas what I could do about this?
> Thanks and best wishes
> 	Stefan
Hi Stefan,
To solve your immediate problem, I'd suggest searching the
lists.debian.org for emacs related mailing lists or possible #debian or
an emacs channel on irc.freenode.net. I have chatted on #debian with
people who use chinese input methods and may also have familiarity with
mule. And additionaly, there maybe hints or bugs in bugs.debian.org
related to mule/emacs.

The reason for my reply follows.

There is currently a debate on the debian-devel mailing list that
relates to the issue that you are experiencing: you are using a
Debian-derivative and then try a similar procedure on Debian expecting a
reproducible behavior and are confused as to why this is. Debian and
Ubuntu, a unique Debian-derivative, are trying to devise a system that
clearly states to Debian-derivative users that difference in application
behavior and/or bugs should be expected. One idea is to change the
attribution of the software package info to reflect who actually changed
the software package as some derivatives leave the info unchanged which 
leads to people:
	1. complaining to Debian developers instead of
	the derivative maintainers.
	2. contributing bug reports to the Debian bug tracking system,
	which then the developer is unable to reproduce because of the
	differences between a derivative and Debian
	3. complaining in #debian when they should be asking on an irc
	channel of the derivative (eg. #knoppix)
At some point in the future Debian may have similar discussion with other
derivitavies like Knoppix.
Kevin Mark
I hope you dont mind me CC the debian-devel list as I think your post is
a data point in the issue being addressed.
counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted!
      `$'         $'         
       $          $                      _
 ,d$$$g$  ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b
,$P'  `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$'  `$ $  "'   `$ $$' `$
$$     $ $$ggggg$ $     $ $ ,$P""  $ $    $
`$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $    $
 `Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $.  ,$.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: