Hi,
Ted Unangst wrote on Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:24:56PM -0500:
> Matthieu Herrb wrote:
>> I would prefer a diff that just add a &&!defined(__OpenBSD__) to the
>> condition before the definition of systemWcwidthOk(). This will cause
>> less risk of conflicts in future updates and clearly show the
>> intention.
> If you prefer that, I would suggest the following to avoid patching multiple
> places. Just short circuit the function.
Makes sense, i committed that version.
Thanks for reporting and for all the feedback,
Ingo
>>> #if OPT_WIDE_CHARS
>>> -#if defined(HAVE_WCHAR_H) && defined(HAVE_WCWIDTH)
>>> -/*
>>> - * If xterm is running in a UTF-8 locale, it is still possible to encounter
>>> - * old runtime configurations which yield incomplete or inaccurate data.
>>> - */
>>> -static Bool
>>> -systemWcwidthOk(int samplesize, int samplepass)
>>> -{
>>> - wchar_t n;
>>> - int oops = 0;
> #ifdef __OpenBSD__
> return 1;
> #endif
>>> -
>>> - for (n = 21; n <= 25; ++n) {
>>> - wchar_t code = (wchar_t) dec2ucs(NULL, (unsigned) n);
>>> - int system_code = wcwidth(code);
>>> - int intern_code = mk_wcwidth(code);
