Bug 240070

Created attachment 154686 [details]
A screenshot of gnome-terminal

In this screenshot, the first line contains the numero sign and a "X" character
directly after it, the second line has only the numero sign, the third line has
three double-width Hiragana characters for comparing, and the fourth line
contains digits 1 to 6 as an example of single-width characters.

Since this bugzilla report was filed, there have been several updates, which may
have resolved this issue. Users who have experienced this problem are encouraged
to upgrade their system to the latest version of their distribution available.

Please, if you experience this problem on the up-to-date system, let us now in
the comment for this bug, or whether the upgraded system works for you.

If you won't be able to reply in one month, I will have to close this bug as
INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Thank you.

Pardon me, but I consider your comment being quite rude: I _had_ reported a bug
on an up-to-date system, yet still for five months there has been no reaction
from Fedora maintainers. And then you appear from nowhere, and without even
looking at the problem you threaten with closing the case.

I would think package maintainers consider bug reports being valuable for them.
Some user of their package has not been clueless enough to discard the whole
overhyped "Linux" thing after experiencing a bug, but instead took his time
writing a bug report, so that future users would not experience the same bug. 

Maybe you can enlighten a clueless user like me concerning the "several" updates
of xorg-x11-fonts-100dpi in FC6. As I can see it from my local Fedora mirror,
there has been precisely zero such updates. Is FC6 still a maintained
distribution or not?

I no longer have a FC6 system with X11 here.
FWIW, I have decided to invest even more time into fixing this bug (I really
like the LucidaTypewriter font), and verified the problem still exists in F7
(xorg-x11-fonts-100dpi-7.1-3.fc7). Moreover, it is present even in RHEL5
(xorg-x11-fonts-100dpi-7.1-2.1.el5). I have verified the later remotely
using following commands:

$ gconftool-2 --set /apps/gnome-terminal/profiles/Default/font \
     -t string 'LucidaTypewriter 12'
$ gconftool-2 --set /apps/gnome-terminal/profiles/Default/use_system_font \
     -t bool false
$ Xvfb :5 &
$ DISPLAY=:5 PS1='â„–XY
123' gnome-terminal &
$ xwd -display :5 -root -out x.xwd
$ xwud -in x.xwd

Feel free to reclassify this bug as RHEL5 if it helps you to justify the time
spent with this bug.

Sorry, forgot to change the status back from NEEDINFO

Dobrý den,

(the rest in English for those fools who don't understand Czech ;-)). I am sorry
for this -- you were a victim of mass-changing old bugs to NEEDINFO state to
find out whether these bugs are still alive (yes, I should make note about it in
the comment, sorry about it). Note, I have never ask you to upgrade to F7 (or
RHEL5 for that matter) just to run 'yum upgrade' on your current installation.

Now to the current bug. First trying on F7 (because that's my stable working
box) and Rawhide, I have found :digraphs command in vim valuable tool for
testing. By that I found that metric information for Lucida Typewriter is really
for character U+064B and/or the rest of the 064* line.

I am not sure why, but although I can reproduce this in the way you described
(by typing <Ctrl-K>N0 in the insert mode of vim), I cannot reproduce the same
problem for U+2116 in :digraphs. Not sure why.

Anyway, this is clearly reproducable bug in Lucida Typewriter fonts.

Created attachment 214681 [details]
chr(1612) in :digraphs

Created attachment 214691 [details]
Numeros sign in :digraphs is OK

Created attachment 214701 [details]
Reproduction of reporter's problem

ALl these are from F7, but I was in the same way able to reproduce it on
Rawhide, which means that it is probably in every Red Hat distribution
(including RHEL, of course).

Switching to devel so as not to loose it when the support of FC6 will be
discontinued in couple of weeks.

Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported
against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no
longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are
flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer
maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now,
we will automatically close it.

If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or
rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change
the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version
or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.)

Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled
these issues to this point.

The process we're following is outlined here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp

We will be following the process here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this
doesn't happen again.

Sorry but those automatic bug closures really annoy me. In the above comments
there is clearly stated that the bug is present in F7 as well, and was
reclassified to "devel" by Matěj Cepl just "in order not to lose it when F6 is
EOLd".

And yes, this bug is still present in F7, F8, _and_ current rawhide. Please do
not attempt to close this bug without a fix in the future :-(

Yenyo, sorry for this miscommunication -- of course this bug won't be closed as
expired. I was not participating in this last round of NEEDINFOing, and somebody
apparently forgot to treat Rawhide bugs differently than Fedora bugs. I am sorry
again. Of course, this bug won't be closed just because of lack of communication
here (which is probably more than anything else our problem).

Well, I promised not to close this bug for being expired, but OTOH I think this
should be moved upstream to http://bugs.freedesktop.org -- Jain, what do you
think? Should I open upstream bug for this?

Jan -

We apologize for any inconveinence that the cleanup effort may have caused.  As
you can obviously tell, the process was automated (and will continue to be so in
the future).  Computers can't read comments, but humans can!  Please be assured
that this bug won't be expired.  You're in good hands with Matej :)

I have tried to report this upstream as
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15381 - hopefully I got the Product
and Component name correctly (they are however different than the Fedora package
name - perhaps the info about where to report upstream bugs should be included
in the RPM package metadata.

Thank you for registering the bug upstream. We will continue to track the issue
in the centralized upstream bug tracker (and help to fix it), and will review
any bug fixes that become available for consideration in future updates.

Thank you for the bug report.