On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:14:42AM +0100, Miroslav Kure wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 09:37:54AM +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > > > However, I'm curious: is there a lot of software that is broken with > > Unicode, particularly with the UTF-8 encoding? I can't remember anything > > much in recent times. > > Mostly it is just the old stuff like > - eterm, aterm > - elvis > - X tools from the basic package (xman, xmessage, xmore, ...) > - TeX without additional packages XeTeX and XeLaTeX allow native UTF-8 input. Should be made the default, IMO, given how obsolete and broken the "standard" TeX encodings are. Being able to write in actual text rather than a lot of illegible incantations was a major revelation, and it's a bit sad it was in that situation in the first place. It also sorts out the awful font support, so you can use standard freetype-registered fonts, again without the pain. Result: a document you can actually read in the editor! IMO all those broken terminal emulators, editors and tools should be put in the bin. There are plenty of non-broken replacements, so why keep them around to bitrot even further? It's not like it's going to cause massive inconvenience--they are long obsolete. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature