Ronan Waide [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is the current code:
;; iso-2022-7bit should be OK (but not optimal for Emacs, at least --
;; emacs-mule would be better) with both Emacs 21 and XEmacs. Emacs
;; 22 will really need utf-8-emacs.
(defconst bbdb-file-coding-system (if (fboundp
The current CVS version of bbdb.el has bogusly changed the coding
system for .bbdb in Emacs 21 to mule-utf-8. That's not, and never
will be, a universal coding system:
(memq 'mule-utf-8
(find-coding-systems-string (string (make-char 'chinese-gb2312 68 99)
Alex Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave Love [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Xavier Maillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what is the *best* or the *recommended* coding system to use for
BBDB knowing that my contacts are world wide.
The one that's set in recent versions (as far as I know
Xavier Maillard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So what is the *best* or the *recommended* coding system to use for
BBDB knowing that my contacts are world wide.
The one that's set in recent versions (as far as I know),
i.e. `iso-2022-7bit', at least if you want to be at all portable
between Emacs
[Let's see if I can send this way, since sourceforge bounces my mail...]
If someone can tell me exactly what's wrong with the patch I
previously sent to waider and Kai, I can probably fix it. (Please
don't just tell me that using coding cookies is wrong, especially
without an alternative.) The
. It's possible Emacs 20 will need a
few extra fixes, particularly for CL-ish things which weren't in 20.
XEmacs _shouldn't_ be affected.
HTH.
2002-04-10 Dave Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* lisp/bbdb-gnus.el (bbdb/gnus-summary-show-all-recipients)
(bbdb/gnus-update-records): Revert
