>>>> 2009/4/28 Michael Jones <[email protected]>: >>>> > @gorillastrong2 >>>> > >>>> > You can re-enable control-alt-backspace by modifying your xorg conf >>>> > file to include the lines >>>> > >>>> > Section “ServerFlags” >>>> > Option “DontZap” “false” >>>> > EndSectionOption “DontZap” “false”
>>> Jens Ropers <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The above is slightly bad information because it's copied and pasted >>>> from or via some program that "prettified" the quotation marks (maybe >>>> MS Word). To work in xorg.conf however, the quotation marks need to be >>>> " [U+0022 (34)], which the above quotation marks aren't; cf.: >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark_glyphs >> 2009/5/8 Michael Jones <[email protected]>: >> > How exactly are you able to verify that when you received the information >> > from a website that undoubtedly modified the input it was given to be >> > correctly represented internally, and then transmitted to be displayed on >> > an unknown browser that operates on an unknown operating system? > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Jens Ropers <[email protected]> wrote: >> Oh cop on. *You* provided the info. It would have been proper for >> *you* to verify that what you're posting is actually useful and >> doesn't contain erroneous characters. It ain't rocket science. I >> checked the characters you provided and detected that they were wrong; >> you ought to have done just that, *before posting them*. But hey, we >> all make mistakes, so it's entirely understandable and forgivable -- >> just don't be defensive about your little screw-up. >> 2009/5/8 Michael Jones <[email protected]>: >> > My suggestion is that a user types the xorg.conf information into >> > xorg.conf manually. its only a few lines, and alleviates any issue with >> > correct >> > type settings. > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Jens Ropers <[email protected]> wrote: >> My suggestion is that you're more diligent next time and don't try to >> pass the buck and blame for your mistakes to others. 2009/5/8 Michael Jones <[email protected]>: > I was asking how you > knew, not accusing you of being wrong. From the amount of knowledge I have, > which yes, is limited, I have no idea how you were able to verify what you > did. First, be aware of the difference between "prettified" so-called "smart" quotation marks and the standard (old ASCII compatible) 0x22 quotation marks; cf.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark#Typing_quotation_marks_from_a_computer_keyboard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark_glyphs#Quotation_marks_in_European_languages I *think* both 0x27 and 0x22 [ie. U+0027 (39) and U+0022 (34)] are legal in xorg.conf -- as in most Unix-like tools and config files. "Prettified" quotes such as U+2018 (8216), U+2019 (8217), U+201C (8220), and U+201D (8221) however probably are not. One way to check exactly what character you're looking at --apart from looking closely and visually distinguishing "prettified" quotation marks from standard ASCII 0x22 quotation marks would be to copy the quotation mark in question, open a shell prompt, type: cat | hd[enter] and then paste the character and press [enter] and Ctrl+D. A slower way to do the same thing (that may however be easier to understand) would be to create a new raw text file (named e.g. testfile, paste the character in question into it and save it, and then look at that file by typing: hexdump -C testfile. If you then see this: 00000000 22 0a |".| 00000002 it means that all is well, and you're using the proper characters. The hex output for the "prettified" quotes however may be harder to parse, because of what it says here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-8#Description Pay attention to the cell located in the third row and last column of the table there. It contains info how the Unicode hex numbers translate to plain hex. The example given there for the euro sign shows that U+20AC does not equal 0x20,0xAC but rather equals 0xE2,0x82,0xAC. Similarly, the “ character's U+201C does not correspond to 0x20,0x1C but rather corresponds to 0xE2,0x80,0x9C. If you look at what's underlined and what's not in that cell, you can see which bits come from the U+xxxx hex number, and which bits are preordained by the Unicode standard, and how you arrive from the four hexadecimal digits (=two bytes) of the U+xxxx number at the six hexadecimal digits (=three bytes) of the pure hex code you'll be able to see with a hex editor. (Yes, it would maybe be easier to also specify the resulting six digit hex code in Unicode character tables, but I'm not sure if that hex code would be consistent across all architectures -- or whether it might be different according to endianness...) You don't need to actually grok all of this; the bottom line is that if your double quotation mark is anything other than 22 in hex, then something is wrong. You can also use fancy-schmancy web 2.0 online converters such as these: http://home2.paulschou.net/tools/xlate/ http://www.hurgh.org/ascbinhex.php Be aware though that the may have glitches; the first one didn't display the "prettified" quotes right for me, and the second one annoyingly required 0x to be prefixed for each two hex digits (WTF? I'm *already* in the hex box; no need to specify hex again!) and also oddly seemed to escape the ordinary ASCII 22 quote. > However, I don't think that > the tone of your reply, that is, if I'm interpreting it correctly, is really > appropriate. Maybe. Sorry for any aggravation; I spoke my mind on the issue; 'nothing personal; no offence. ;) Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some firefox extension that might show you character code details on request. Or other similar tools. I haven't looked though. I'll shut up now before someone complains that this isn't a discussion forum. regards --ropers -- REISUB is broken https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/303601 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
