|Summary:||gedit has problems with 3 gb18030 testing files|
|Product:||[Retired] Red Hat Linux||Reporter:||Yu Shao <yshao>|
|Component:||gedit||Assignee:||Havoc Pennington <hp>|
|Status:||CLOSED WONTFIX||QA Contact:|
|Version:||9||CC:||eng-i18n-bugs, katzj, otaylor|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2003-05-06 07:11:00 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Yu Shao 2003-01-30 01:42:43 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020830 Description of problem: gedit has problems with three standard gb18030 testing files, `cat` them in gnome-terminal is ok. 1. double1.txt, there is one character whose GB code is A9F0(UxE801), it should appear as "unicode squre" in gedit, but right now a strange character looks like a Tibetan. The position is the 1st character of the last line. 2. user1.txt, this file should be totally unicode squares in gedit, but right now, the first 2 paragraphs have strange characters and spaces. 3. wei.txt, strange wrong bold characters are randomly appeared. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.GinGin-re0128.nightly 2.Open those three testing files from here: http://junk.brisbane.redhat.com/gb18030/ 3. Additional info:
Comment 1 Yu Shao 2003-01-30 01:47:46 UTC
Sorry, about double1.txt, it should be 3 characters, not one, although they are looked like one large. the unicodes are from UxE801-UxE803.
Comment 2 Leon Ho 2003-01-30 02:15:58 UTC
Owen, is it because we have some new fonts that covers these codepoints? gnome-terminal will be unified across the screen because it uses one font across the way.
Comment 3 Havoc Pennington 2003-02-03 20:49:55 UTC
Is this gedit-specific or does it happen in any GtkTextView widget?
Comment 4 Leon Ho 2003-02-11 00:58:00 UTC
it happens in any GtkTextView widget
Comment 5 Paul Gampe 2003-02-11 02:46:24 UTC
This is a blocker for our GB18030 compliance test so raising priority. To meet the current GM schedule we must ship CDs for testing to the PRC by Thursday.
Comment 6 Owen Taylor 2003-02-11 03:44:54 UTC
I assume user1.txt is PUA characters. there is no definition of these at all, so why do you expect them to show as Unicode hex squares? Yes, the values presumably come from some font on the system which has some glyphs in the PUA... if you strace -e open, you should be able to figure out which one fairly easily.
Comment 7 Yu Shao 2003-02-11 03:58:30 UTC
Yeah, user1.txt is in PUA. When testing centre opens the user1.txt, because there is no corresponding glyph(in GB18030), so they wanted to see full unicode squares like user2 and user3.
Comment 8 David Joo 2003-02-11 07:24:49 UTC
Created attachment 89987 [details] Screenshot of the problem part of double1.txt
Comment 9 David Joo 2003-02-11 07:28:18 UTC
Created attachment 89988 [details] another problem part in double2.txt This is another problem that eng-asia discovered just then, for double1.txt it looks like some hebrew, but for double2.txt, it looks something like arabic characters.
Comment 10 Owen Taylor 2003-02-11 20:31:18 UTC
double1.txt and double2.txt are just like user1.txt -- since these codes are not assigned in GB18030, they aren't in the font, fontconfig displays whatever font in the system does contain them, and some of our hebrew and arabic fonts have miscellaneous glyphs at various points in the PUA space. I don't see how this is incorrect behavior. But can't you remove fonts-hebrew and fonts-arabic for GB18030 compliance testing? The characters appearing in Wei.txt are for various reasons: - In some cases Zysong doesn't contain assigned Unicode code points (such as Arabic digits or Arabic presentation forms) - In other cases, some of the fonts on the system contain glyphs at unassigned code points for one reason or the other In no cases does it appear that characters that are present in Zysong.ttf are appearingly in a different font. [I'd really like to see us in the future shipping a GB18030 font without the "copied from the Unicode book" glyphs for Arabic and other similar languages. It causes considerable problems to have a font that pretends to cover languages, but doesn't really cover them.]
Comment 11 Leon Ho 2003-02-12 00:38:31 UTC
Jeremy, can we exclude the those font packages in comps if it is zh_CN?
Comment 12 David Joo 2003-02-12 02:06:30 UTC
The font pkgs that we have problem with are: double1.txt - fonts-hebrew double2.txt - fonts-arabic user1.txt - bitmap-fonts I have uninstalled those pkgs and tested the files and display is 'fine' after that.
Comment 13 Leon Ho 2003-05-06 07:11:00 UTC
Closing it for now.