Mule bugs: misidentification (Latin-1 vs. Chinese), revert issues

[Nix]

On 26 Oct 2006, stephen at xemacs.org verbalised:
> Nix writes:
>
>  > On 23 Oct 2006, stephen at xemacs.org uttered the following:
>  > > AFAIK you should never get "Auto" in the modeline; that should always
>  > > be replaced with a real coding system ("Auto" is short for
>  > > "autodetect").
>  > 
>  > If that `never' is `never ever ever', well, I have a *lot* of Gnus
>  > Article buffers here with `Auto' in the modeline.
>
> Article buffers are constructed, not read from files.  I was referring
> to something read from outside.  Gnus basically has the stance that
> Mule doesn't work so it's going to do it all itself; it doesn't bother
> to get things Mule-correct most of the time AFAICT.

Ah, right. That makes sense, then.

(I *have* noticed some aspects of Gnus's MIME-handling improving when
MULE is active: I suppose without MULE, Gnus has *no* chance of
displaying unusual characters...)

> Could you send a build report the next time you build?  M-x
> build-report RET.  That way I'll have some idea what exactly your
> configuration is.

OK. I can provide my 14 local patches, too (some already present in 21.4
but I didn't port them forward because I'm a moron).

I'll send a build-report in a few minutes.

>                    If you're seeing ugly warnings,

Only the usual aliasing warnings (surprisingly few of them, actually:
back in 21.4 it was -fno-strict-aliasing or death).

>  > My .emacs does contain:
>  > 
>  > (set-coding-priority-list '(utf-8 iso-8-1 utf-8-bom)) ; Use UTF-8 or ISO-8859-x
>  > (set-language-environment "English")            ; A reasonable default
>
> As you surmise that should have nothing to do with it.
>
> Is there a reason to have "utf-8-bom" following "iso-8-1"?

Just because I've never ever in my entire life *seen* a file with the
BOM, so if there was *any* chance of FPs I wanted to eliminate it.
I deal with ISO-8859-1 all the time, so...

>                                   I mean, how many text/plain files do
> you see that start with "???" ??

Not all too terribly many if you put it like that :)

>                                   (I suppose in Arabic or Cyrillic it
> might become something sensible.  Do you read any of the non-Latin
> scripts?)

Not yet, but I *do* deal with Arabic files occasionally (typesetting
stuff). I've never seen that sequence there in Arabic, either.

> Which is a long-winded way of saying, "if you have an empirical reason
> for this, it's probably an XEmacs bug!"

It's pure hunchery :)

-- 
`When we are born we have plenty of Hydrogen but as we age our
 Hydrogen pool becomes depleted.'