This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: proposal: making sure all locales use the same section order
- From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere at hungry dot com>
- To: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 23:03:48 +0200
- Subject: Re: proposal: making sure all locales use the same section order
- Bcc: Petter Reinholdtsen <petter dot reinholdtsen at usit dot uio dot no>
- References: <E19SNNt-0005fW-00@minerva.hungry.com> <3EEF8080.1070000@redhat.com>
[Ulrich Drepper]
>> Any order would do, but I suggest wo stick with the order of the
>> sections in the only standard document I have available, ie ISO/IEC TR
>> 14652:202(E):
>
> Why do you keep referring to this unusable write-up which has no
> approval by anybody and which does not reflect what we have in
> glibc?
Because it is the only document I have available that seem to document
the format of the locale files. Is there some other standard related
document that describes the format?
>> Is this a good or a bad idea?
>
> It means extra work and therefore I wouldn't do it. If somebody
> else does, fine. But then make absolutely sure the file content
> stays the same. Use md5sum or so on the created files before and
> after the changes.
Do you suspect that reordering the locale files will change the
content of the generated locales? I believed reordering the locale
was safe. Am I wrong?
But I was going to do the job myself, so no problem there. And by
only making it a documented recommondation, there is no need to do
this right away. It will then hopefully happen over time. :)