Tinker <ti...@openmailbox.org> writes: > What would the decision be based on?
I think that those points should be enough. - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of Boost.". What would be the benefit for the ports tree? - someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential breakage. > Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff? You tell us. ;) > I guess anyhow that it's fair to say that OpenBSD machines do process > Unicode and not just Ascii and that the Unicode usecase only will grow > with time. > > > > On 2015-12-16 01:04, Kirill Bychkov wrote: >> On Tue, December 15, 2015 19:48, Tinker wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I need the ICU parts of Boost. And, I really guess internationalized >>> stuff is becoming more and more popular. >>> >>> Currently: >>> >>> /usr/ports/devel/boost$ grep -r icu * >>> Makefile: --without-icu \ >>> >>> Would you feel like changint that to --with-icu, and then adding >>> "icu4c" >>> as a dependency to boost as to provide for that? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Tinker >>> >>> >> Hi. >> There was a discussion and patches [0] but still no decision yet. >> >> [0] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=144120909505095&w=2 > -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
