[WBEL-users] Character Set Changes - Missing Chars

John Hinton webmaster@ew3d.com
Mon, 02 Aug 2004 12:25:22 -0400


Vincent.Raffensberger@dtn.com wrote:

>I missed my guess on your mysqld threads question, but I'll try again with 
>this one.
>
>Replace the content of /etc/sysconfig/i18n with this:
>LANG="en_US"
>SUPPORTED="en_US:en"
>SYSFONT="lat0-8"
>SYSFONTACM="iso01"
>
>The default font set (?latarcyrheb-sun16) works fine in a GUI terminal but 
>not a vt100 terminal emulator.
>
>  
>
OK, this is what I have found.

First, since the UTF char set is 'odd', at least in M$'s eyes, and since 
it cannot understand many chars coming in from Windows, I've decided I 
need to make a change. The latest for instance was a webpage uploaded 
which had text copied and pasted into it from Word. " marks are showing 
up in the text on the server as <93> and <94>. Lots of other chars are 
wrong as well.

So, this is on the way in.... a very important thing to recognize. The 
addition of a line in the html code to tell the browser the char set, 
does not work because the system doesn't know what it is to start with 
and replaces these unknown chars. This is horrid, as we have moved a LOT 
of sites to the server and then found this issue. We are faced with 
finding them or letting our clients find them and then making the 
repairs and uploading the fixes. Many of these were rsync'd over and the 
original files are gone, as far as our backups are concerned. This is a 
DOG!!!!! Literally thousands of pages to go through!

That said, I have used the above code to replace my i28n file. (after 
backing up the original one) Does anybody know if there is a service I 
can restart to make this take effect? Or is this down so far that the 
machine needs to be rebooted completely?

Thanks for all the help. And all should be aware of this issue if you 
are running a webserver and allow others to upload to that server. I 
hear that W3C allows these chars and RHEL can't by default setup read 
them. I'm sorry, but I'm left wondering what RedHat could be thinking? 
Why the change? Why did we have no problems on RedHat 7.2 and then 
change to something that seems to me to not conform to what has become 
standards?

Thanks,
John Hinton