Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.81; *output* buffer is set to UTF-8

[David Kastrup]

Peter Dyballa <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 06.11.2005 um 10:09 schrieb David Kastrup:
>
>> The question is whether the _characters_ appearing in the buffer are
>> what you would have expected.
>>
>
> There are few problems before answering this ...
>
> I need a mathematical environment with ö or ä -- an ü would do it too,
> I presume. Or an ß instead of β? Well, I have no idea whether this
> nonsense is supported by TeX.

You can use AMS-LaTeX.  The documentation should be accessible with

    texdoc amsldoc

Either loading the amsmath package (which provides a lot of good stuff
for equation writing) or just amstext will leave you with the \text
command.

> I am no Emacs developer so I can be completely wrong in assuming
> that the coding-system, as indicated in the mode-line, can be
> connected to the way GNU Emacs displays a file's contents in that
> buffer.

It has nothing to do with the display.  It only determines how stuff
is written out to files and read back in.

For example, if you cut and paste text from an utf-8 buffer into a
latin-1 buffer, ä does not magically become something different.

And the process encoding system is something similar to the file
coding system.  Again it decides how a byte stream will get converted
into Emacs' internal representation.

> But, OK, I don't want to stick to the coding-system, I am very
> flexible and can re-write my bug report that the output buffer does
> not show ä or ö. It codes these two cryptically as \<some probably
> octal sequence>. This scheme makes the user know more about codings
> than is necessary.
>
> Can you accept this as a description of a bug in AUCTeX?

No.  You don't include an original file which gives you the problems.
You don't include the corresponding output buffer.  You don't tell
what commands you used.  You do not use the M-x TeX-submit-bug-report
RET command which would actually clue us in what versions of Emacs you
happen to be using on what operating systems with what settings.

I already said that AUCTeX is likely to get this incorrect (and we are
not yet in the position of fixing it), but preview-latex should be
getting it correctly.  So you should really include the output from a
preview-latex run, reported with M-x preview-report-bug RET.  If
_that's_ being wrong, it is unexpected and is in need of fixing (since
that is what will at one time will become generally used in AUCTeX).

As I said: one is a current shortcoming of AUCTeX which we are aware
of.  The other may be a bug in preview-latex which needs to get
fixed.  But your report is complete unsufficient for finding out what
might have gone wrong.

_Please_ use the M-x preview-report-bug RET command for reporting the
problem.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum