From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs-unicode: different encoding of iso-2022-7bit? Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:29 +0900 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1097628826 11776 80.91.229.6 (13 Oct 2004 00:53:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 00:53:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 13 02:53:33 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CHXOW-00043A-00 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 02:53:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CHXVX-00025u-NR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:00:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CHXVL-00025X-N5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:00:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CHXVL-00025D-0w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:00:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CHXVK-00024w-Sg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:00:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [202.32.8.202] (helo=tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CHXNa-0008LO-Kl; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:52:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp (mailgate54.nec.co.jp [10.7.69.195]) by tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id i9D0qWn03617; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:32 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id i9D0qWL11275; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:32 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from edtmg02.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.26.16.202]) by mailsv3.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILSV4-NEC) with ESMTP id i9D0qVN09299; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:31 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by edtmg02.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9D0qTh3000087; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:30 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mctpc71 (mctpc71.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp [10.30.118.121]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.12.10/8.12.8/EDcg v2.01-mc/1046780839) with ESMTP id i9D0qTwt018063; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:29 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by mctpc71 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 491664A6; Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:52:29 +0900 (JST) Original-To: emacs-unicode@gnu.org System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: (Miles Bader's message of "Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:25:53 +0900") Original-Lines: 23 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:28326 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:28326 I wrote: >> I've attached a diff showing the changes -- if you visit it in emacs, >> you'll see that it looks like the inserted and deleted lines are all >> equal (except for my addition at the top of course)! But if you use >> `find-file-literally', you can see that the file encodings are actually >> different. > > An update: actually the lines only look the same if you view it in > emacs-unicode -- if you view the diff file in the CVS trunk emacs, in > fact the `rewritten' characters generated by emacs-unicode are rendered > as double-width characters. Hi, does anybody have any idea about this bug, or a work-around? I think it's a fairly serious problem -- I've stopped using Emacs 22 because I can't edit Emacs' ChangeLogs with it (they're encoded using iso-2022-7bit). Thanks, -Miles -- Is it true that nothing can be known? If so how do we know this? -Woody Allen