On 12/31/2012 09:14 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> stage3 now includes non-ASCII paths, via app-misc/ca-certificates -- e.g.:
> /usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/TÜBİTAK_UEKAE_Kök_Sertifika_Hizmet_Sağlayıcısı_-_Sürüm_3.crt
>
> Working with those (e.g., backup) probably requires a UTF-8 loca
Hi,
stage3 now includes non-ASCII paths, via app-misc/ca-certificates -- e.g.:
/usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/TÜBİTAK_UEKAE_Kök_Sertifika_Hizmet_Sağlayıcısı_-_Sürüm_3.crt
Working with those (e.g., backup) probably requires a UTF-8 locale. Is
this considered acceptable? Did anyone notice?
--
On Friday, August 03, 2012 07:16:45 AM Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 07/27/2012 07:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > yes, and i'm waiting on the POSIX group to formalize C.UTF-8. that's the
only
> > real option in my mind for making unicode the default. any other
> > amalgamations of various locales
On 03/08/2012 09:54, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> I don't think anyone will object to enforcing a given locale to be
> present, even en_US.UTF-8; people will object if they have to use that
> locale.
>
> Maybe locale-gen can even generate it on-the-fly in $T, I don't know.
Agreed. And there _is_ a way
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:47:24 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> > Python upstream is doing what they think is best in using unicode.
> >
> > That said, what if we just temporarily set a locale in the ebuild
> > for running tests and elsewhere? Is this unreasonable or
> > impossible? It might not be a gre
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:59:42 -0500
Matthew Summers wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Mike Gilbert
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
> > wrote:
> >> On 01/08/2012 23:42, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> >>> Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I oft
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
> wrote:
>> On 01/08/2012 23:42, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often find in
>>> spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to t
On 07/27/2012 07:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> yes, and i'm waiting on the POSIX group to formalize C.UTF-8. that's the
> only
> real option in my mind for making unicode the default. any other
> amalgamations of various locales is ugly as sin.
When they meet? I'd be fine with a pre-release
On 31 July 2012 05:33, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/30/12 12:28, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> My point here is that you want the thing to change. So you first try to
>> convince people here to change. We practically did a small survey here
>> and in the result we didn't agree on doing the change.
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 11:21:40 -0700
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 01/08/2012 23:42, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often
> > find in spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to tell
> > that person to switch to UTF-8 to get those py
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
> On 01/08/2012 23:42, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often find in
>> spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to tell that person
>> to switch to UTF-8 to get those python pa
On 01/08/2012 23:42, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often find in
> spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to tell that person
> to switch to UTF-8 to get those python packages emerged? I hope not.
Tell that to the Python team I gue
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 08:42 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 01-08-2012 21:00:23 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > Diego mentioned the python issue.
>
> Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often find in
> spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to tell that person
On 01-08-2012 21:00:23 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> Diego mentioned the python issue.
Honestly, if some asian person has whatever charset that I often find in
spam messages, but is not UTF-8, are you then going to tell that person
to switch to UTF-8 to get those python packages emerged? I hope no
02.08.2012 04:20, Walter Dnes wrote:
> That's right... the poster was running a POSIX locale for several
> years ***AND DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS RELATED TO IT***.
This discussion is very similar with one, that i have seen in Russian
Linux community some years ago about migrating from ru_RU.KOI
Walter Dnes wrote:
> The fact that "other distros do it" does not constitute
> justification for us to do it.
Unfortunately that exact reason, along with "Fedora is doing it", was
cited by a very active developer as reason to reject technical points
which I tried to make a few times.
But that is
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> We're ignoring a very basic question here... what problems does
> shipping with a POSIX locale cause that would be fixed by setting a UTF8
> default locale??? I want a real answer. Not something along the lines
> of "But daddy, all the other k
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 04:29:42PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote
> Every locale is wrong for somebody; the idea was that by taking
> a survey, you could make it wrong for the least amount of people
> (by default).
Question... has anybody ever considered that maybe a POSIX locale
is wrong for th
On 08/01/12 16:18, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
>>
>> If it turns out that C or POSIX is the most common response, we should
>> then default the locale to en_US.UTF-8 if we really want to default to
>> a UTF-8 setting. The reason being it makes sense to have the default
>> locale set to the country
>
> If it turns out that C or POSIX is the most common response, we should
> then default the locale to en_US.UTF-8 if we really want to default to
> a UTF-8 setting. The reason being it makes sense to have the default
> locale set to the country of origin, which in our case is the United
> State
On 07/30/12 15:02, Walter Dnes wrote:
> Would forcing UTF-8 cause problems for packages that expect
> specific ISO encodings in X fonts?
Not that I know of (and setting a default wouldn't force anything).
xfreecell's readme states "Make sure there is a font named 7x14" and
another thread mentions
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 01:33:48PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote
> The technical objection to C.UTF-8 is that it's non-standard, Ok.
> What are the technical objections to LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8? If the
> alternatives are all improvements, the statistics are irrelevant.
I ran into a problem sever
On 07/30/12 12:28, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> My point here is that you want the thing to change. So you first try to
> convince people here to change. We practically did a small survey here
> and in the result we didn't agree on doing the change.
>
> So you're saying we should do another survey on
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:50:29 -0400
> Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> On 07/30/12 10:41, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400
>> > Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:50:29 -0400
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/30/12 10:41, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400
> > Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> >
> >> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
> >>>
> >>> No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a defaul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/30/2012 11:04 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Michał Górny
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400 Michael Orlitzky
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
No user will be happ
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
>
> You'd really want to a "which do you prefer, which can you use"
> survey, then; You don't really want to choose the result preferred by
> the most people, rather you want the result which is usable by the
> most people.
I tend to agree. Do
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400
> Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>> >
>> > No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a default.
>>
>> The defaults should be what's best for the most p
On 07/30/12 10:41, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400
> Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>>>
>>> No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a default.
>>
>> The defaults should be what's best for the most people, with a bia
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
> >
> > No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a default.
>
> The defaults should be what's best for the most people, with a bias
> towards safety. Why don't we just take a s
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>>
>> No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a default.
>
> The defaults should be what's best for the most people, with a bias
> towards safety. Why don't we just take a survey
On 07/27/12 16:16, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>
> No user will be happy with whatever we decide to use as a default.
The defaults should be what's best for the most people, with a bias
towards safety. Why don't we just take a survey and choose the most
common utf8 response?
Il 27/07/2012 13:16, Aaron W. Swenson ha scritto:
> Really, how much of an inconvenience is it that we don't use UTF-8 as
> a default?
Given that there are a ton and a half of Python packages that do not
work with a non-utf8 locale, I'd say it's quite a thing.
So either we go with an UTF-8 defaul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/27/2012 02:29 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El vie, 27-07-2012 a las 13:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger escribió:
>> On Friday 27 July 2012 08:13:16 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
>> wrote:
>>> Ulrich Mueller schrieb:
As I had pointed out before [1], ch
El vie, 27-07-2012 a las 13:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger escribió:
> On Friday 27 July 2012 08:13:16 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> > Ulrich Mueller schrieb:
> > > As I had pointed out before [1], changing from POSIX to an en_US
> > > locale will have undesirable side effects, like commas as tho
On Friday 27 July 2012 08:13:16 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Ulrich Mueller schrieb:
> > As I had pointed out before [1], changing from POSIX to an en_US
> > locale will have undesirable side effects, like commas as thousands
> > separators in numbers (because of LC_NUMERIC). Also the defa
Ulrich Mueller schrieb:
> As I had pointed out before [1], changing from POSIX to an en_US
> locale will have undesirable side effects, like commas as thousands
> separators in numbers (because of LC_NUMERIC). Also the defaults of
> en_US for LC_MEASUREMENT and LC_PAPER are only useful in the U.S.
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:34:01 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 27 July 2012 16:06, Dan Douglas wrote:
> > On Friday, July 27, 2012 09:08:36 AM Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
> >>
> >> > I understand why the council rejected Debian's C.UTF-8 option,
> >> >
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 10:38:30 +0200
Cyprien Nicolas wrote:
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
> >>
> >> So let's upgrade to en_US.UTF-8, which is for most users more
> >> desirable than the current situation. Of course we will still
> >> advise them to set their
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
>>
>> So let's upgrade to en_US.UTF-8, which is for most users more
>> desirable than the current situation. Of course we will still advise
>> them to set their desired locales in /etc/locale.gen. But at least
>> they will start with
On 27 July 2012 16:06, Dan Douglas wrote:
> On Friday, July 27, 2012 09:08:36 AM Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
>>
>> > I understand why the council rejected Debian's C.UTF-8 option,
>> > but is there really no better default that we can use?
>>
>> > Withou
On Friday, July 27, 2012 09:08:36 AM Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
>
> > I understand why the council rejected Debian's C.UTF-8 option,
> > but is there really no better default that we can use?
>
> > Without any default locale set, in practically all case
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/27/2012 03:08 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> As I had pointed out before [1], changing from POSIX to an en_US
> locale will have undesirable side effects, like commas as thousands
> separators in numbers (because of LC_NUMERIC). Also the defaults
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Ben de Groot wrote:
> I understand why the council rejected Debian's C.UTF-8 option,
> but is there really no better default that we can use?
> Without any default locale set, in practically all cases that means
> that the user is presented with English, and mostly the
On 20 July 2012 06:28, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Sascha Cunz wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason for not using at least en_US.UTF-8 as a "sane"
>> default value?
>
> Because there's no one-size-fits-all locale, but it is specific to
> every system so the user must configure it?
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Sascha Cunz wrote:
> Is there a reason for not using at least en_US.UTF-8 as a "sane"
> default value?
Because there's no one-size-fits-all locale, but it is specific to
every system so the user must configure it?
The matter was recently discussed in this mailing list
Sascha Cunz schrieb:
> Is there a reason for not using at least en_US.UTF-8 as a "sane" default
> value?
It has been discussed some time ago already. Setting LANG="en_US.UTF-8"
would mess with collation rules, measurement&paper units etc. which has
the potential to make users outside USA unhappy.
I recently discovered that I for some reason haven't noticed the warning about
setting the locale to utf-8 in the gentoo handbook for obviously several
years; thus i was still running all my systems in a POSIX locale since i never
cared much about it.
However, since I noticed, I talked to sever
48 matches
Mail list logo
