Re: locale specific ordering in EN_US vs. characterset collation rules for UTF-8

2013-06-28 Thread Chet Ramey
On 6/28/13 1:04 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: > > > Chet Ramey wrote: >> The world is larger than glibc and the glibc locale definitions. We need >> a solution that encompasses all of it. That solution should, and maybe >> will, include glibc, but that is not sufficient by itself. > > I don't

Re: locale specific ordering in EN_US vs. characterset collation rules for UTF-8

2013-06-28 Thread Linda Walsh
Paolo Bonzini wrote: Il 28/06/2013 07:04, Linda Walsh ha scritto: > > Chet Ramey wrote: >> The world is larger than glibc and the glibc locale definitions. We need >> a solution that encompasses all of it. That solution should, and maybe >> will, include glibc, but that is not sufficient by i

Re: locale specific ordering in EN_US vs. characterset collation rules for UTF-8

2013-06-28 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 28/06/2013 07:04, Linda Walsh ha scritto: > > > Chet Ramey wrote: >> The world is larger than glibc and the glibc locale definitions. We need >> a solution that encompasses all of it. That solution should, and maybe >> will, include glibc, but that is not sufficient by itself. > > I

Re: locale specific ordering in EN_US vs. characterset collation rules for UTF-8

2013-06-27 Thread Linda Walsh
Chet Ramey wrote: The world is larger than glibc and the glibc locale definitions. We need a solution that encompasses all of it. That solution should, and maybe will, include glibc, but that is not sufficient by itself. I don't suppose it is possible to use the Unicode collatio