[Bug libc/2799] New: Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] New: Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
There are a couple of locale/charset combinations currently unsupported
for which a character set is mentioned in the locale file:

$ grep -i charset az_AZ bg_BG mk_MK POSIX ur_PK wal_ET
az_AZ:% Charset: ISO-8859-9E
bg_BG:% this: bg_BG.CP1251 (CP1251 is for coresponding charset),
bg_BG.KOI8R,
mk_MK:% Charsets: UTF-8, ISO-8859-5, CP1251
POSIX:# Charset: ISO646:1993
ur_PK:% Charset: CP1256
wal_ET:% Charset: UTF-8

Thus the following should be valid additions to localedata/SUPPORTED:

az_AZ.ISO-8859-9/ISO-8859-9 \
bg_BG.KOI8R/KOI8R \
bg_BG.ISO-8859-5/ISO-8859-5 \
mk_MK.CP1251/CP1251 \
ur_PK.CP1256/CP1256 \
wal_ET/UTF-8 \

Note that I've left the defaults as are, so I add
ur_PK.CP1256/CP1256 \
instead of
-ur_PK/UTF-8 \
+ur_PK/CP1256 \
+ur_PK.UTF-8/UTF-8 \

Not sure about these as a POSIX locale is present although undefined in
localedata/SUPPORTED:

POSIX/ISO_646.BASIC \
POSIX.UTF-8/UTF-8 \

I can provide a patch if needed, although the above should be easily cut and
pastable.

--
           Summary: Locale/charset combinations missing from
                    localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files
           Product: glibc
           Version: 2.3.6
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: libc
        AssignedTo: drepper at redhat dot com
        ReportedBy: leonard-glibc-bugs at ottolander dot nl
                CC: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2006-06-19 16:10 -------
I'm not going to add all combinations people might eventually find useful.  This
is why localedef is a program sysadmins can use to customize their systems.

--
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
In reply to this post by tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From leonard-glibc-bugs at ottolander dot nl  2006-06-19 16:23 -------
These are not "combinations that people might eventually find useful". These
character sets are explicitely being mentioned in the locale file as being valid
or even the default.


--
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
In reply to this post by tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From leonard-glibc-bugs at ottolander dot nl  2006-06-19 16:29 -------
This is why I filed bug 2800 separately.


--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
In reply to this post by tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com  2006-06-19 23:24 -------
What the locale authors thinks is needed is completely irrelevant.  I only add
the absolute minimum.

There will be no change.  Period.

--
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
In reply to this post by tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From leonard-glibc-bugs at ottolander dot nl  2006-06-19 23:30 -------
Not even the addition of wal_ET/UTF-8? There's no valid locale/charset
combination for wal_ET yet.


--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug libc/2799] Locale/charset combinations missing from localedata/SUPPORTED although mentioned in locale files

tim@mr-dog.net
In reply to this post by tim@mr-dog.net

------- Additional Comments From leonard-glibc-bugs at ottolander dot nl  2006-06-19 23:54 -------
One more thing. localedata/SUPPORTED currently states:

# If you have any additions please file a glibc bug report.

If "only adding the minimum" is your policy you might want to explain that
policy in that file. This might avoid people like me filing bug reports for
issues they perceive as being inconsistent (certain locales supporting charsets
that are not supported in other locales that _explicitely_ mention them). Saves
you and us time. Thanks.


--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2799

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.