annoying changes in gnome-terminal
1. In gnome terminal I've been using the font `Bitstream Vera Sans Mono 10',
which was a good size for me. However after doing an apt-get upgrade
from unstable yesterday (the actual change may have been earlier, as I
just got back from a week-long holiday; my previous `working' apt-get
upgrade was a little over a week ago), it now is _not_ a good size, it's
suddenly much bigger. The next lower size of that font (9) is the _same_
width (only the _height_ of the character change!), and the next-next
lower size (8) is much smaller (too small); I now can't seem to select a
good size of this font in gnome terminal at all.
Other than the apt-get upgrade, I didn't change any settings.
The weird thing is that in other gnome apps, and in emacs, I can still
select my `preferred size' just fine. E.g., in gedit, I can select
`Bitstream Vera Sans Mono 9' and that's the same font that I used to get in
gnome-terminal with size 10.
In emacs, I use the following x font spec:
-bitstream-bitstream vera sans mono-medium-r-normal-*-*-100-*-*-*-*-*-*
which gets me the font I want:
-bitstream-bitstream vera sans mono-medium-r-normal--10-86-83-84-m-60-iso8859-1
2. Another new problem with gnome-terminal is that it's no longer displaying
Japanese characters correctly; it used to work with no special effort,
but now japanese characters output from commands are displayed as little
empty boxes. I use LANG set to `ja_JP.eucJP' (set from gdm), and again
things seem to work properly in gedit and emacs (so at least I know it's
probably not a installed-font problem or something).
I don't know why only gnome-terminal seems to be affected, but then fonts in
debian are a big fragile glump to me; I guess I was lucky that things worked
for even a short while...:-(
So ... any ideas? Has anyone heard of similar problems, or have a clue
where the trouble actually lies?
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]