Cyril Brulebois, le Mon 28 Feb 2011 01:42:54 +0100, a écrit : > Thomas Dickey <dic...@radix.net> (10/11/2006): > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 03:00:11AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > By doing this (putting a mail-like > in front of U+2218), you're making > > > vim output U+2218 in bold font (because the mail syntax expresses a > > > color that result into bold font in your vim configuration). Then xterm > > > has to draw a bold U+2218. The problem is that for this you need a bold > > > font that holds U+2218, and it seems your system doesn't have any (just > > > like mine, actually), so xterm can't do much. > > > > From the context, it sounds as if the font contains other glyphs that work. > > I might be able to improve it by making xterm check if the normal/bold > > fonts contain a different number of glyphs, and in that case add some > > checks to use the normal glyph when the bold one is missing. > > What's the status here?
Still reproducable. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
