Paul Hardy writes ("Unicode License Additional Coverage"):
> Unicode, Inc. has informed me that they just added the directory
> http://www.unicode.org/ivd/data/ to the list of directories explicitly
> mentioned as covered by their license; see
> http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html#License.
>
> A
Yao Wei,
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 9:18 PM "Yao Wei (魏銘廷)" wrote:
>
> Never mind. I was wrongfully read as the license has the problem.
>
> (It is that, IVD files had no license attached to it, someone might think it
> is "All rights reserved" by copyright law in most jurisdictions. Please
> corr
Never mind. I was wrongfully read as the license has the problem.
(It is that, IVD files had no license attached to it, someone might think it is
"All rights reserved" by copyright law in most jurisdictions. Please correct me
if I am wrong again.)
Yao Wei
(This email is sent from a phone; sor
Hi,
Could you elaborate what part of license that someone might have concern?
It looks like X11 license for me at the first glance.
Yao Wei
(This email is sent from a phone; sorry for HTML email if it happens.)
> On Jan 4, 2019, at 04:49, Paul Hardy wrote:
>
> Dear Debian,
>
> Unicode, Inc
Paul Wise writes:
> Please ask your upstreams to remove the Unicode data files from their
> version control systems and source tarballs and instead check for and
> use external Unicode data files at build-time or run-time. Then your
> packages can Build-Depend or Depend on the unicode-data binary
Adam Borowski angband.pl> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 02:54:43PM +0200, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > > Unicode 7.0 was recently released. I discovered some source packages
> > > contain outdated copies of various Unicode data files. At minimum, the
> >
> > I know that xterm’s wcwidth.c direl
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> It’s a bit more than a table. Also, the process involves some
> unfree-for-a-BSD (GNU GPL) code that does part of the transformation.
> For jupp, I have to do other parts by hand, including review…
Could you explain in more detail?
Perhap
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> I'd have to study it a little more, but I'm not sure this actually makes
> sense for a package like ICU whose sole purpose in life is handling
> Unicode.
Could you explain in more detail, I'm not following your thought process here?
How do
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh dixit:
>Make it generic, instead. You could just automatize the table update
>through a script, and allow it to either fetch the data over the network
>using curl/wget/whatever (default), or to get the data from a local file.
It’s a bit more than a table. Also, the pr
Paul Wise wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Unicode 7.0 was recently released. I discovered some source packages
> contain outdated copies of various Unicode data files. At minimum, the
> following packages embed part of the Unicode data (UnicodeData.txt).
>
> . . .
>
> Please ask your upstreams to remove th
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 20:29:59 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> If your package converts the Unicode data to another format at build
> time you should add a Built-Using header to the relevant binary
> packages. The fntsample package is an example of how to do this.
>
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-p
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> I updated unicode-data already to 7.0, so the data is present and
> packaged in Debian
> so there is no need to fetch via curl, etc.
> Build-Dep on unicode-data and then updates should simply be a binNMU ?
That is fine for Debian but u
I updated unicode-data already to 7.0, so the data is present and
packaged in Debian
so there is no need to fetch via curl, etc.
Build-Dep on unicode-data and then updates should simply be a binNMU ?
regards
Alastair
On 18/06/2014 14:40, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Henrique
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Make it generic, instead. You could just automatize the table update
> through a script, and allow it to either fetch the data over the network
> using curl/wget/whatever (default), or to get the data from a local file.
That w
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Furthermore, with upstream *and* Debian maintainer hat on, I refuse to
> use a Debian-specific “special way” here. I will only fix this upstream
> (and there, there is no unicode-data package).
Make it generic, instead. You could just automatize the t
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 02:54:43PM +0200, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > Unicode 7.0 was recently released. I discovered some source packages
> > contain outdated copies of various Unicode data files. At minimum, the
>
> I know that xterm’s wcwidth.c direly needs updating, and that mgk
> doesn’t do th
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Paul Wise wrote:
> Unicode 7.0 was recently released. I discovered some source packages
> contain outdated copies of various Unicode data files. At minimum, the
For mine, mksh and jupp do, but they do not use the data files directly.
Instead, when Unicode is updated, I change
On Monday 04 August 2003 19:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 05:27:38PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von
Bidder wrote:
> > > see, there's no lucidatypewriter ISO-10646 font, but I don't have all
> > > the packages installed.
> >
> > I have -b&h-lucidatypewriter-medium-r-no
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 05:27:38PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> > see, there's no lucidatypewriter ISO-10646 font, but I don't have all
> > the packages installed.
>
> I have -b&h-lucidatypewriter-medium-r-normal-sans-*-*-*-*-m-*-iso-10646-1
> with
> '36 names match' in
On Friday 25 July 2003 18:57, Colin Watson wrote:
> Oh, konsole? No idea, as I don't use KDE. I saw your mentions of font
> problems elsewhere in this thread. Have you tried, say, uxterm with a
> known-good UTF-8 font? I use
> '-misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--15-140-75-75-c-*-iso10646-1' on my work
>
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 05:19:24PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> On Friday 25 July 2003 12:21, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 11:43:15AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von
> > Bidder wrote:
> > > Hmmm. This is really funny. Look at
> > > http://fortytwo.c
On Friday 25 July 2003 13:51, Michael Piefel wrote:
> Am 25.07.03 um 11:43:15 schrieb Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder:
> > Hmmm. This is really funny. Look at
> > http://fortytwo.ch/~avbidder/man-page.png.
>
> Good you mention it. File a bug against gnupg. It uses '-' in its
> manpage where it
On Friday 25 July 2003 12:21, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 11:43:15AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von
Bidder wrote:
> > On Friday 25 July 2003 11:10, Michael Piefel wrote:
> > > What's a "dash"? Sorry, but you have to be more specific here.
> > > There's the minus sign (usual
#include
* Michael Piefel [Fri, Jul 25 2003, 01:51:33PM]:
> > What I don't really get: I use the same font for almost everything
> > (lucidatypewriter), definitely so for the mail composer and the konsole. So
> > while the fact that copy-pasting it 'solves' the problem hints at a font
> > prob
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 03:12:29PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 11:20, Colin Watson wrote:
> > In groff \- is a dash, - is a hyphen. People need to use the right one.
> > If you have other problems let me know, since I'm not aware of any in
> > unstable right now.
>
> In unico
On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 11:20, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 10:04:26AM +0100, David Pashley wrote:
> > Probably the biggest unicode problem I have noticed is with man and/or
> > less where it can't display dashes correctly. At least it doesn't seem
> > to work out of the box.
>
> In
Am 25.07.03 um 11:43:15 schrieb Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder:
> Hmmm. This is really funny. Look at
> http://fortytwo.ch/~avbidder/man-page.png.
Good you mention it. File a bug against gnupg. It uses '-' in its
manpage where it should use '\-'.
> What I don't really get: I use the same
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 11:43:15AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> On Friday 25 July 2003 11:10, Michael Piefel wrote:
> > What's a "dash"? Sorry, but you have to be more specific here.
> > There's the minus sign (usually introducing options) and the hyphen
> > (for hyphenatio
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 11:20:27AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> The man (really: groff) issue is known, but AFAICT the fix is really, really
> difficult since groff just doesn't know anything about encodings, and the man
> page sources are in a variety of encodings. groff
On Friday 25 July 2003 11:10, Michael Piefel wrote:
> Am 25.07.03 um 10:04:26 schrieb David Pashley:
> > Probably the biggest unicode problem I have noticed is with man and/or
> > less where it can't display dashes correctly. At least it doesn't seem
> > to work out of the box.
>
> What's a "dash"?
On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 10:04:26AM +0100, David Pashley wrote:
> Probably the biggest unicode problem I have noticed is with man and/or
> less where it can't display dashes correctly. At least it doesn't seem
> to work out of the box.
In groff \- is a dash, - is a hyphen. People need to use the ri
On Friday 25 July 2003 11:04, David Pashley wrote:
> Probably the biggest unicode problem I have noticed is with man and/or
> less where it can't display dashes correctly. At least it doesn't seem
> to work out of the box.
Fully ACK
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat ~/bin/man
PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin
Am 25.07.03 um 10:04:26 schrieb David Pashley:
> Probably the biggest unicode problem I have noticed is with man and/or
> less where it can't display dashes correctly. At least it doesn't seem
> to work out of the box.
What's a "dash"? Sorry, but you have to be more specific here. There's
the minu
On Jul 25, 2003 at 09:38, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder praised the
llamas by saying:
Content-Description: signed data
> On Wednesday 30 October 2002 14:11, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
>
> > Is Debian aims to be unicode compatible system?
>
> IANADD - but I guess the answer definitely is
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 14:11, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> Is Debian aims to be unicode compatible system?
IANADD - but I guess the answer definitely is yes. But it's not a very urgent
task.
> If yes, then should I mail a bug report against packages which are not
> able to handle unicode
Sebastian Rittau wrote:
Is Debian aims to be unicode compatible system?
[snip]
For example, grep is not able to search unicode strings.
Is it not?
Sorry, it was bad example. I made wrong test.
--
Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> For example, grep is not able to search unicode strings.
Yes it is. Are you sure you are using a unicode locale?
See for instance:
$ export LC_ALL=fr_FR
$ echo "skål" | iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf8 | grep -q "sk.l" && echo OK
$ export LC_A
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:11:46PM +0100, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> Is Debian aims to be unicode compatible system?
Not officially, although I think that this is a worthwhile goal and
there are various efforts that try to bring Debian a little bit closer
to ubiquitous Unicode support.
> If y
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote:
> For example, grep is not able to search unicode strings.
It can't search for UTF-8? Why not?
T
--
thomas thurman - marnanel at marnanel dot org - http://marnanel.org
You are in a long, narrow corridor stretching out of sight to the west
39 matches
Mail list logo
