From: Jungshik Shin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm sorry I forgot that I always had built Mozilla with a patch
that went into the trunk only a few days ago. That patch was made so
long time ago (and it's only necessary for Devanagari but not for Tamil)
that it was taken for granted
From: Jungshik Shin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Happy 2004!
History so far: stock Mozilla on Linux does not render devanagari
correctly. That is well-known, but it is rumoured that a build
with CTL will do. No such builds are publicly available.
Building Mozilla is not entirely straightforward o
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004, Jungshik Shin wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > If you yearn for the old days
> >
> > You seem to have a very slow mind.
>
> I don't know whose mind is slow. I gave all the necessary information
> and you couldn't still make it work. Here's one mor
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > If you yearn for the old days
>
> You seem to have a very slow mind.
I don't know whose mind is slow. I gave all the necessary information
and you couldn't still make it work. Here's one more try with a
step-by-step instruction (actually, there's
> If you yearn for the old days
You seem to have a very slow mind.
The goal is to obtain a system configuration in which
Mozilla renders a devanagari page correctly. Not more, not less.
I don't care whether that is done using old or new methods.
If only it works. Then I can go on to Hebrew..
If
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Good. So no need to worry about the html page.
Actually, there is. By 'sun_devanagair_font', I didn't mean that
you use that verbatim but that you have to replace that name by the
actual name of Sun's font. Besides, it's always a good practice to p
It works fine on my machine with SunIndic truetype fonts installed.
The string there is rendered exactly like the image below.
Good. So no need to worry about the html page.
Remains to worry about Mozilla and/or the X server and/or fontconfig.
> The old build showed in Edit/preference
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [Installed Fedora 1 on a spare machine - compiled Mozilla 1.6b
> after ./configure --enable-ctl --enable-xft . It runs fine (*), but
> doesnt show what I expect to see.]
>
> Let me repeat my question, this time referring to
> http://homepages.cwi.nl/
[Installed Fedora 1 on a spare machine - compiled Mozilla 1.6b
after ./configure --enable-ctl --enable-xft . It runs fine (*), but
doesnt show what I expect to see.]
Let me repeat my question, this time referring to
http://homepages.cwi.nl/~aeb/moz/test.html
Andries
[(*) - Well, screenfuls of
> On Unix/Linux you need a CTL-enabled build
Are such builds available?
--
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jungshik wrote:
>
>
> Thanks !
You're welcome.
> However, I will not pursue this further. Have no time.
> For the time being it seems this is something where Internet Explorer
> works, and Mozilla still requires a nontrivial amount of work.
There are certainly a lo
Jungshik wrote:
Thanks!
However, I will not pursue this further. Have no time.
For the time being it seems this is something where Internet Explorer
works, and Mozilla still requires a nontrivial amount of work.
Andries
(Posted to mozilla-build or so. Awaiting moderator approval.
The languag
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [A week or so ago I wrote a multilingual text, and several
> languages failed under default Mozilla. If we succeed in
> getting a version that handles devanagari then a next point
You have to make sure to tag the Devanagari part with 'lang="hi-IN"'
f
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> but I tried compiling on a Debian (Woody) and on a RedHat (7.2) machine.
> In both cases Mozilla-1.6b.
>
> For Debian the compiled binary does not run. Errors are like reported:
> ./mozilla-bin: relocation error:
> mozilla/dist/bin/components/libgf
From: Jungshik Shin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Recently I noticed that for me the sequence U+092C U+093F (b i)
> is rendered by Mozilla as b followed by i, while in fact the i glyph
> should precede the b glyph.
Devanagari is not s
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Jan Willem Stumpel wrote:
> It would be nice if solutions to common problems (in this case
> 'how to put an UTF-8 string on to the screen', solved, e.g., by
> Openoffice) were shared between different open-source projects.
OpenOffice uses ICU's layout engine that supports s
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Recently I noticed that for me the sequence U+092C U+093F (b i)
> is rendered by Mozilla as b followed by i, while in fact the i glyph
> should precede the b glyph.
>
> Is something wrong in my expectations? or in Mozilla? or in my
> Mozilla 1.5 setu
aeb wrote:
> Recently I noticed that for me the sequence U+092C U+093F (b i)
> is rendered by Mozilla as b followed by i, while in fact the i glyph
> should precede the b glyph.
Edward H. Trager replied, and I agree:
> This seems to imply that the stock Linux Mozilla packages
> available for dow
Edward H. Trager wrote:
> This seems to imply that the stock Linux Mozilla packages
> available for download are useless for Indic languages ...
Maybe that conclusion goes too far. Could be that it is only a
problem with the letter à (u+092c). My guess (but I donÂt know any
Indic language) is tha
On Tuesday 2003.12.23 17:34:50 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Recently I noticed that for me the sequence U+092C U+093F (b i)
> is rendered by Mozilla as b followed by i, while in fact the i glyph
> should precede the b glyph.
I see the same problem with a stock Mozilla 1.5 Linux download
(Mozi
Recently I noticed that for me the sequence U+092C U+093F (b i)
is rendered by Mozilla as b followed by i, while in fact the i glyph
should precede the b glyph.
Is something wrong in my expectations? or in Mozilla? or in my
Mozilla 1.5 setup?
Andries
--
Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels
A
21 matches
Mail list logo
