unarchive 418324
reopen 418324
found 235-2
thanks
Hi Thomas,
I regret to report that Debian report #418324 does not actually appear to
be resolved, or regressed by the time of XTerm 235.
The attached screenshot should bring most relevant facts to light.
As a preliminary, note that on my system I have patched the font aliases to
provide "-unicode" variants for the stock X11 font aliases for ISO
8859-1-encoded fonts. Those custom aliases' expansions are exhibited in
the screenshot for your perusal.
Also, my discussion is confined to the default fonts used in XTerm's (and
UXTerm's) applications-default fonts, and furthermore nil2 is excluded from
consideration.
Salient features of the screenshot:
1) The 9x15 font has glyphs at codepoints U+2329 and U+232A, as illustrated
by the xfd client.
2) A "default" uxterm which has been sized up to use the 9x15 font via the
menus continues to display the glyphs as double-wide dotted boxes, as if
the font did NOT define the glyphs.
3) When uxterm is invoked with the -fn option and given each of the stock
.font{,2,3,4,5,6} fonts as a parameter (even in their ISO-10646-encoded
forms), a crude substitution appears to be used, even for a font like 9x15
which defines the glyphs at those codepoints.
4) The exception to 3) is 6x13, a.k.a. "fixed".
I am also attaching my little "glyphs" text file, which combined with the
simple shell commands in my screenshot should constitute a crude unit test
for this bug.
Please contact me if you need further information or would like me to try
any experiments.
--
G. Branden Robinson | Build a fire for a man, and he'll
Debian GNU/Linux | be warm for a day. Set a man on
branden@debian.org | fire, and he'll be warm for the
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett
Attachment:
glyph_weirdness_reborn.png
Description: PNG image
U+2328 KEYBOARD ⌨ U+2329 LEFT-POINTING ANGLE BRACKET 〈 U+232A RIGHT-POINTING ANGLE BRACKET 〉 U+232B ERASE TO THE LEFT ⌫
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
