As I understand, the current NLS configuration forces X applications to use only ISO10646-1 fonts for displaying Cyrillic letters under ru_RU.UTF-8. Unfortunatelly, there are not that many ISO10646-1 fonts that include Cyrillics and it would be nice if X new to pick up koi8-r fonts as well. After all, /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/XLC_LOCALE (http://freedesktop.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/xc/nls/XLC_LOCALE/en_US.UTF-8?root=xorg) does say "We leave the legacy encodings in for the moment, because we don't have that many ISO10646 fonts yet.", except unfortunatelly the KOI8-R encoding is not among the legacy ones it knows about. P.S. Related: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68725 http://bugs.xfree86.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1186
I know that Solaris supports the koi-r and ansi-1251 encodings for the ru_RU.UTF-8 locale... but a quick grep over the Xorg tree shows no trace of such support... I fear this may be really an unique Solaris feature (well, you can switch over to Solaris/x86 :) Alan: Am I correct with the observation that the *.UTF-8 locale in the Xorg tree does not allow non-"iso10646-1"-fonts to be used in applications (e.g. you MUST use ru_RU.KOI8-R to be able to use "koi-r"-encoded fonts) ?
Sorry - I have no idea.
Please see http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68725#c18 for a proposed fix. I have not tried it myself, but the author believes that it works.
Has anyone reviewed the proposed patch for this? If so, what are the objections if any to including it in the tree? If none, why isn't it in the tree?
Fixing Bug #1401, namely adding the needed Cyrillic glyphs to the relevant *-ISO10646-1 BDFs, is probably the simplest solution to this request.
It's worst than that; in UTf-8 the cyrillic glyphs come from CJK fonts cyrillic encoding fonts (not only koi8-r, also iso8859-5) should come before CJK fonts. Bug #2676 has a patch for default UTF-8 XLC_LOCALE font list that solves it (and is more general, as it also handle Greek and other font encodings for which there have traditionally being standalone fonts while the iso10646-1 could lack the needed glyphs) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2676 ***
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.