Re: index_format and <bar> vs <space>, segment fault
On Friday, June 16, 2006 at 12:21:56 +0200, Ye Fei wrote:
> I have read that [Debian Bug#339555] report, although I do not
> understand it well.
Thanks for the thorough checking: It's indeed the same problem. I do
not understand it any better: Some (most) elements point to a Glibc bug,
and some elements point to a Mutt or Mutt/Glibc interaction bug. I can't
reproduce the problem at all, and so far nobody could reproduce it
outside of Mutt. I don't know what to do next, so will probably reassign
Bug#339555, and see what Glibc people think of it.
In the meantime the --with-regex build option should help avoiding
the segfaulting calls to Glibc. I hope.
> I must use gbk locale, because I need chinese language support, and
> UTF-8 gives me a lot of trouble.
OK. But may I ask what trouble? For Chinese, Mutt should work more
or less identically in a GBK and in an UTF-8 locale. Of course setup has
to be coherant, $assumed_charset feature is mandatory, and there are
nuances in some latin characters width. But it should work.
> command "env LANGUAGE=en_US mutt"
There is no point trying LANGUAGE: It's no locale, but NLS. A little
bit like a super-LC_MESSAGES which would be a non-portable GNUism.
> It is amazing that the chinese characters can also be displayed
> correctly in mutt in this [LANG=en_US] case.
Wait a second: That should *not* work. Each Chinese character, being
unconvertable from GBK to Latin-1, should be masked by 2 question marks.
This probably means you didn't correct your setup as suggested in my
previous mail (remove evil hardcoded $charset from muttrc).
Bye! Alain.
--
When you post a new message, beginning a new topic, use the "mail" or
"post" or "new message" functions.
When you reply or followup, use the "reply" or "followup" functions.
Do not do the one for the other, this breaks or hijacks threads.