This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Gracefully handle incompatible locale data
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Ludovic CourtÃs <ludo at gnu dot org>
- Cc: OndÅej BÃlka <neleai at seznam dot cz>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, guix-devel at gnu dot org, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:30:50 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Gracefully handle incompatible locale data
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <876132lbic dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20150922191804 dot GA13637 at domone> <877fnijgin dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20150922215022 dot GA27201 at domone> <8737y4hkrz dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20150924082755 dot GA4767 at domone> <87h9mjeqyy dot fsf at gnu dot org> <5605BA8D dot 40907 at redhat dot com> <87h9mh5vgn dot fsf at gnu dot org> <5609A8E9 dot 7050201 at redhat dot com> <87io6t1wbu dot fsf at gnu dot org>
On 09/29/2015 04:08 AM, Ludovic CourtÃs wrote:
> "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> skribis:
>
>> On 09/26/2015 06:24 AM, Ludovic CourtÃs wrote:
>>> Furthermore, the function in question returns EINVAL in other similar
>>> casesâe.g., when libc 2.22 loads LC_COLLATE data from libc 2.21.
>>
>> If you change this particular case to EINVAL, what does the user see
>> as a result of this change?
>
> The user-visible change is that, if incompatible or broken locale data
> is found, a call like:
>
> setlocale (LC_ALL, "");
>
> returns EINVAL instead of aborting.
Perfect.
>> Do they get a non-zero exit code from `localedef --list-archive` along
>> with an error written out to stderr?
>
> âlocaledefâ starts with:
>
> setlocale (LC_MESSAGES, "");
> setlocale (LC_CTYPE, "");
>
> so it will no longer abort when invalid locale data is found (although
> in the 2.21 â 2.22 transition, only the LC_COLLATE data format differs
> anyway.)
OK.
> Apart from that, âlocaledef --list-archiveâ simply opens the locale
> archive (typically /usr/lib/locale/locale-archive, regardless of the
> âLOCPATHâ environment variable value), so its behavior is unchanged.
>
> Am I overlooking something?
If the locale-archive is upgraded to the new format with LC_COLLATE changed
what happens when you run localedef --list-archive? Does it list zero locales
and exit with an exit code of zero?
I would hope that it prints something about the broken locale, because after
the removal of the assertion you won't know anything is wrong with the archive?
>> This is the kind of change I'm expecting. If we are removing an assertion,
>> we should be replacing it with something meaningful and verifying that
>> meaningful change.
>
> Yes, agreed.
>
> The function that is changed, â_nl_intern_locale_dataâ, has only two
> callers in libc, and both check whether it returns NULL. So it seems to
> me that the code is not introducing anything new in the API contract.
> WDYT?
It isn't introducing anything new, but you are removing an assert and we need
to make sure that the intent of the design remains: Warn the user something
is wrong with the locale data.
I see two cases:
- What does setlocale() return?
- Verified. You say it returns EINVAL for the affected locale and that's perfect.
- What does localedef --list-archive return?
- The new LC_COLLATE format will make it's way into the binary locale archive
and that means glibc can't read the locale-archive? Does it fail? exit code?
If we cover those two cases with some kind of error message then I think we're done.
Cheers,
Carlos.