On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 15:15:26, Steven Penny wrote:
Expanding on the "Notepad" example, "Notepad" default font is "Lucida
Console", which doesnt have U+FFFD either. However pasting into "Notepad" will
still show U+FFFD properly because "Tahoma" has U+FFFD and "Notepad" can
utilize composite font,
On Sep 7 19:01, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> Am 07.09.2018 um 18:48 schrieb Brian Inglis:
> > On 2018-09-07 05:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > > On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > > > On Sep
On Sep 7 10:48, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2018-09-07 05:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> >> On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> >>> On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > On 07.09.2018 10:17,
Am 07.09.2018 um 18:48 schrieb Brian Inglis:
On 2018-09-07 05:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen
On 2018-09-07 05:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>>> On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Sep 6 09:01,
On 2018-09-07 05:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>>> On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Sep 6 09:01,
On Sep 7 13:51, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > > On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > > > On Sep 5
On 07.09.2018 13:41, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen
On 07.09.2018 13:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
OTOH, in my testing this only
On Sep 7 12:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > > OTOH, in my testing this only occurs for DejaVu Sans
On 07.09.2018 10:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
OTOH, in my testing this only occurs for DejaVu Sans Mono. I installed
Liberation Mono and Noto Mono as well and the
On Sep 6 09:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > OTOH, in my testing this only occurs for DejaVu Sans Mono. I installed
> > > Liberation Mono and Noto Mono as well and the above problem never occurs
> >
On Sep 5 18:35, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > OTOH, in my testing this only occurs for DejaVu Sans Mono. I installed
> > Liberation Mono and Noto Mono as well and the above problem never occurs
> > with them. Weird. I'm about to let this slip as
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:14:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
OTOH, in my testing this only occurs for DejaVu Sans Mono. I installed
Liberation Mono and Noto Mono as well and the above problem never occurs
with them. Weird. I'm about to let this slip as a font bug.
as you prob know ive been testing
On Sep 5 17:58, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 5 15:18, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> > Am 05.09.2018 um 13:58 schrieb Steven Penny:
> > > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 09:55:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> > > Using this file:
> > >
> > > $ cat glyph.c
> > > #include
> > > #include
> > >
On Sep 5 15:18, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> Am 05.09.2018 um 13:58 schrieb Steven Penny:
> > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 09:55:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> > Using this file:
> >
> > $ cat glyph.c
> > #include
> > #include
> > int main()
> > {
> > CONSOLE_FONT_INFOEX ta;
> >
Greetings, Marco Atzeri!
> Strange on W10 CMD I obtain
> DejaVu Sans Mono
>U+FFFD: failure
>U+2592: failure
>U+25A1: failure
>U+01C4: failure
> Consolas:
>U+FFFD: failure
>U+2592: success
>U+25A1: success
>U+01C4: success
> May be original Windows "DejaVu Sans
Greetings, Houder!
>> > a character that DejaVu Sans Mono actually doesnt have is:
>>
>> > U+01C4 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER DZ WITH CARON
>>
>> > Using this file:
>>
>> How to compile it?
>> Simple "gcc glyph.c" fails with
>>
>> /tmp/ccSCYXAP.o:glyph.c:(.text+0xbd): undefined reference to
>>
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 16:31:33, Andrey Repin wrote:
> Greetings, Steven Penny!
>
> > a character that DejaVu Sans Mono actually doesnt have is:
>
> > U+01C4 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER DZ WITH CARON
>
> > Using this file:
>
> How to compile it?
> Simple "gcc glyph.c" fails with
>
>
Greetings, Steven Penny!
> a character that DejaVu Sans Mono actually doesnt have is:
> U+01C4 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER DZ WITH CARON
> Using this file:
How to compile it?
Simple "gcc glyph.c" fails with
/tmp/ccSCYXAP.o:glyph.c:(.text+0xbd): undefined reference to `__imp_CreateFontW'
Am 05.09.2018 um 13:58 schrieb Steven Penny:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 09:55:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Using this file:
$ cat glyph.c
#include
#include
int main()
{
CONSOLE_FONT_INFOEX ta;
ta.cbSize = sizeof ta;
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 09:55:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I added DejaVu Sans Mono per the above and to my surprise I see this:
$ cat alfa.txt
=EF=BF=BD
So it looks like Deja Vu has a 0xfffd char. However, GetGlyphIndicesW
claims otherwise:
a character that DejaVu Sans Mono actually doesnt
Am 05.09.2018 um 09:55 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 4 04:40, Steven Penny wrote:
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 11:00:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Whereever you get DejaVu Sans Mono from.
Cygwin provides it via the "dejavu-fonts" package, or you can get it here:
http://dejavu-fonts.github.io
My
On Sep 4 14:40, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2018-09-04 12:20, Steven Penny wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 16:18:21, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> >> My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be just
> >> blank
> >> space which is certainly worse than ▒.
>
> Not according to the sample
On Sep 4 04:40, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 11:00:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Whereever you get DejaVu Sans Mono from.
>
> Cygwin provides it via the "dejavu-fonts" package, or you can get it here:
>
> http://dejavu-fonts.github.io
>
> > My W10 console only allows to specify a
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 23:43:16, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Traditionally, many terminals used to display the DEL character as a
checkered block, which is more or less the MEDIUM SHADE.
This makes the glyph appear somewhat "erroneous" by convention.
I see - now that Unicode has some dedicated characters
Am 04.09.2018 um 21:53 schrieb Steven Penny:
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 20:41:48, Thomas Wolff wrote:
...
the .notdef glyph is not an appropriate indication of illegal
encoding (like broken UTF-8 bytes)
true, but neither is U+2592. as far as i know U+2592 is not defined
officially
anywhere as being
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 13:59:10, Doug Henderson wrote:
My preference is to remove the output fiddling code that Corrina has
been working on. It is trying to solve the wrong problem.
I think we have gone down a rabbit hole at the wrong end of cat's data flow.
this has nothing to do with "cat". it
On 2018-09-04 12:20, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 16:18:21, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be just blank
>> space which is certainly worse than ▒.
Not according to the sample below: you would have to know that medium shade
means
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 10:13, Steven Penny wrote:
> You get this result with Linux:
>
> $ cat alfa.txt
> �
>
> Where "cat" properly outputs Unicode 'REPLACEMENT CHARACTER' (U+FFFD). However
> with Cygwin you get this:
>
> $ cat alfa.txt
> ▒
>
> Where "cat" outputs Unicode
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 20:41:48, Thomas Wolff wrote:
No idea what you consider dangerous. Anyway, we obviously agree that
hardly any available console font supports the REPLACEMENT CHARACTER.
You had previously suggested code that might work (using CreateFont(0,
0, )). Maybe you can sort out
Greetings, Thomas Wolff!
>>> My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be
>>> just blank space which is certainly worse than ▒.
>>> If conhost does not provide a reasonable way to enquire 0xFFFD
>>> availability it's conhost's fault, not cygwin's so why should cygwin
>>>
Am 04.09.2018 um 20:20 schrieb Steven Penny:
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 16:18:21, Thomas Wolff wrote:
My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be
just blank space which is certainly worse than ▒.
If conhost does not provide a reasonable way to enquire 0xFFFD
availability it's
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 16:18:21, Thomas Wolff wrote:
My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be just
blank space which is certainly worse than ▒.
If conhost does not provide a reasonable way to enquire 0xFFFD
availability it's conhost's fault, not cygwin's so why should
On 4. 9. 2018 16:18, Thomas Wolff wrote:
My vote is against the patch because the nodef glyph will often be just blank
space which is certainly worse than ▒.
How often is "often"? Do the default Windows fonts have okay nodef glyphs?
By the way, how does this work with OEM fonts?
--
David
On 04.09.2018 14:49, David Macek wrote:
On 4. 9. 2018 11:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
We either keep 0xfffd now and the user gets the nodef glyph, or I revert
the patch and let the console print 0x2592 MEDIUM SHADE again.
Decision has to be made today. I will release 2.11.1 tomorrow.
I
Greetings, Corinna Vinschen!
>> Result:
>>
>>DejaVu Sans Mono: SUCCESS
> Whereever you get DejaVu Sans Mono from. My W10 console only allows to
> specify a handful of fonts, Consolas, Courier New, Lucida, MS Gothic,
> NSimSun, Raster Fonts, SimSun-ExtB.
Something like
printf "DejaVu Sans
On 4. 9. 2018 11:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
We either keep 0xfffd now and the user gets the nodef glyph, or I revert
the patch and let the console print 0x2592 MEDIUM SHADE again.
Decision has to be made today. I will release 2.11.1 tomorrow.
I vote for keeping the patch and printing
On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 11:00:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Whereever you get DejaVu Sans Mono from.
Cygwin provides it via the "dejavu-fonts" package, or you can get it here:
http://dejavu-fonts.github.io
My W10 console only allows to specify a handful of fonts, Consolas, Courier
New, Lucida, MS
On Sep 3 15:15, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 23:02:58, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > I can't. I only have a limited set of fonts available in the console.
>
> http://superuser.com/questions/390933/add-font-cmd-window-choices/956818
>
> > What I just did was calling the
On 2018-09-03 16:15, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 23:02:58, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> I can't. I only have a limited set of fonts available in the console.
Install dejavu-fonts package or just DejaVu Sans Mono font from:
https://dejavu-fonts.github.io/Download.html
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 23:02:58, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
I can't. I only have a limited set of fonts available in the console.
http://superuser.com/questions/390933/add-font-cmd-window-choices/956818
What I just did was calling the GetFontUnicodeRanges function
for each font, and it turns out
On Sep 3 22:42, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 03.09.2018 um 22:27 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > On Sep 3 21:14, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Sep 3 20:20, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > Am 03.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Thomas Wolff:
> > > > > Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > > > >
Am 03.09.2018 um 22:27 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 21:14, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 3 20:20, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Am 03.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Thomas Wolff:
Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb
On Sep 3 21:14, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 3 20:20, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > Am 03.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Thomas Wolff:
> > > Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > > > On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > > Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > > > >
On Sep 3 20:20, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 03.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Thomas Wolff:
> > Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > > On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > > > > On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > >
Am 03.09.2018 um 19:56 schrieb Thomas Wolff:
Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10,
Am 03.09.2018 um 19:16 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Actually, the width problem I
On Sep 3 18:34, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> > On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > > > Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other
Am 03.09.2018 um 16:59 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other response (and even
referring to the wrong character) does not
On 2018-09-02 06:51, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
>> Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other response (and even
>> referring to the wrong character) does not apply as mintty enforces proper
>> width in that case.
>> Also, even with fonts that
On Sep 3 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > > Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other response (and even
> > > referring to the wrong character) does not apply as mintty enforces
> > > proper
On Sep 2 05:51, Steven Penny wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> > Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other response (and even
> > referring to the wrong character) does not apply as mintty enforces
> > proper width in that case.
> > Also, even with fonts that
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 10:07:10, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Actually, the width problem I suggested in my other response (and even
referring to the wrong character) does not apply as mintty enforces
proper width in that case.
Also, even with fonts that do not provide the glyph, you will usually
still see
Am 02.09.2018 um 00:49 schrieb Steven Penny:
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:50:04, Doug Henderson wrote:
This is an issue with rendering the character in the terminal window.
In both the CMD/Conhost/bash and Mintty/bash terminals, I have
configure the font to be Lucinda Console. This font does not have
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:50:04, Doug Henderson wrote:
This is an issue with rendering the character in the terminal window.
In both the CMD/Conhost/bash and Mintty/bash terminals, I have
configure the font to be Lucinda Console. This font does not have a
glyph for U+FFFD: Replacement Character. (To
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 10:13, Steven Penny wrote:
...
> You get this result with Linux:
>
> $ cat alfa.txt
> �
...
> with Cygwin you get this:
>
> $ cat alfa.txt
> ▒
...
This is an issue with rendering the character in the terminal window.
In both the CMD/Conhost/bash and
Am 01.09.2018 um 20:46 schrieb Steven Penny:
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 20:11:15, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Which terminals are used and what's the output of `locale` and `cat
--version` in both cases?
...
Note that in addition to Linux, Windows PowerShell also gives correct
output:
$ pwsh -c
On Sep 1 09:13, Steven Penny wrote:
> Using this file:
>
>$ printf '\353\n' > alfa.txt
>
>$ iconv -f CP1252 alfa.txt
>ë
>
> You get this result with Linux:
>
>$ cat alfa.txt
>�
>
> Where "cat" properly outputs Unicode 'REPLACEMENT CHARACTER' (U+FFFD). However
> with
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 20:11:15, Thomas Wolff wrote:
Which terminals are used and what's the output of `locale` and `cat
--version` in both cases?
Linux:
$ echo "$TERM"
xterm-256color
$ locale
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
LC_CTYPE="en_US.UTF-8"
LC_NUMERIC="en_US.UTF-8"
Am 01.09.2018 um 18:13 schrieb Steven Penny:
Using this file:
$ printf '\353\n' > alfa.txt
$ iconv -f CP1252 alfa.txt
ë
You get this result with Linux:
$ cat alfa.txt
�
Where "cat" properly outputs Unicode 'REPLACEMENT CHARACTER' (U+FFFD).
However
with Cygwin you get this:
Using this file:
$ printf '\353\n' > alfa.txt
$ iconv -f CP1252 alfa.txt
ë
You get this result with Linux:
$ cat alfa.txt
�
Where "cat" properly outputs Unicode 'REPLACEMENT CHARACTER' (U+FFFD). However
with Cygwin you get this:
$ cat alfa.txt
▒
Where "cat" outputs
62 matches
Mail list logo
