[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: glibc-utf8-locales

From: Philip McGrath
Subject: Re: glibc-utf8-locales
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2022 13:55:42 -0000


On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 10:02:25 AM EST Simon Josefsson via wrote:
> tis 2022-03-08 klockan 10:28 +0000 skrev Tobias Geerinckx-Rice:
> > Hullo Simon,
> > 
> > Simon Josefsson via <> wrote:
> > > First, I wonder if this is optimal.  There must be many machines
> > > (servers and embedded) where having all locales installed on is
> > > wasteful, but where it is useful to have the C.UTF-8 and/or
> > > en_US.UTF-8
> > > installed, to get minimal working UTF-8 support.  Making this hard
> > > to
> > > achieve for users seems unhelpful to me.  I understand the
> > > motivation
> > > for the patch
> > 
> > I don't think you do, if that's what you thought it was ;-)
> Sorry I was unclear -- I reckon the motivation for the patch was that
> the semantics with the old glibc-utf8-locales package was confusing
> (not containing all UTF-8 locales).  Still, I think the old package did
> provide some useful aspect which is now lost, and has to be worked
> around with more complex logic.  Offering a newer more simple solution
> is what I'm asking for.  Meanwhile I'm happy to use the more complex
> solution that you helped me with (below).

Would it make any sense to define a `glibc-utf8-locales` package that actually 
does include all of the UTF-8 locales?

In hindsight, it seems like it might have been better to have a more gradual 
transition from recommending `glibc-utf8-locales` in the docs to removing it, 
if that required everyone to update their configurations. (I haven't had a 
problem personally, though.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]