[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?
From: |
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> |
Subject: |
Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what? |
Date: |
07 Oct 2002 16:19:25 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 |
>> > What can a sysadm do to fix this misconfiguration of thinking that
>> > rawin-r is iso8859-5 (if it is one)?
>> Yes, it is a misconfiguration since the two encodings are not the same.
>> A sysadmin can just look at the /some/where/fonts.aliases file and
>> remove the bogus alias.
> Is it enough grep the fontpath reported by xset? Or can this
> fonts.aliases file be long gone, so that the traces are present in the
> compiled version only?
I think you're right: the file might indeed be long gone, included inside
the resulting `fonts.dir' file. I'd grep through any `fonts.*' in the
fontpath directories returned by xset.
Stefan
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Peter J. Acklam, 2002/10/01
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Jason Rumney, 2002/10/01
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/02
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>, 2002/10/03
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/05
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>, 2002/10/05
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/05
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?,
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> <=
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/07
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>, 2002/10/08
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/08
- Re: MULE shows gibberish; RAWIN-R vs iso8859-5, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/08
Re: MULE shows gibberish; now what?, Ilya Zakharevich, 2002/10/09