Bug#359006: xterm: unicode glyph rendering glitch
Package: xterm
Version: 210-2
Severity: minor
Unicode characters generally render properly in my xterm, using
LANG=en_US.UTF-8, however I just noticed a glitch. When U+2218 is
rendered in some colors, it turns into the dashed box that usually
denotes a bad character. To reproduce:
- start vim in an xterm, with LANG=en_US.UTF
- enter insert mode and type the sequence
ctrl-V u2218
You should see a nice function composition symbol, U+2218: ∘
- Now colorise it by typing ":set ft=mail" and then entering "> " before
the symbol. When it changes color, it turns into a dashed box.
If I cut and past it into another application, it shows up correctly as
a function composition symbol, so xterm clearly still knows what it
should be; it just doesn't render it properly. Also, I don't see the
same problem with most other unicode characters, but it does seem to
afflict others in the same range.
Andrew
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.15-1-686
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Versions of packages xterm depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.6-4 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libfontconfig1 2.3.2-5 generic font configuration library
ii libice6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 Inter-Client Exchange library
ii libncurses5 5.5-1 Shared libraries for terminal hand
ii libsm6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System Session Management
ii libx11-6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System protocol client li
ii libxaw7 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Athena widget set library
ii libxext6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System miscellaneous exte
ii libxft2 2.1.8.2-5.1 FreeType-based font drawing librar
ii libxmu6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System miscellaneous util
ii libxt6 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Toolkit Intrinsics
ii xlibs-data 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System client data
Versions of packages xterm recommends:
ii xutils 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 X Window System utility programs
-- no debconf information
Reply to: