This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] localedata: convert all files to utf-8


On 12 Feb 2016 19:33, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> On 12-02-2016 19:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 12 Feb 2016 09:55, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> >> On 11-02-2016 21:08, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> On 11 Feb 2016 16:28, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> >>>> On 09-02-2016 02:43, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>>>> On 08 Feb 2016 19:46, Paul Eggert wrote:
> >>>>>> This looks good. It is almost exactly the localedata/locales subset of my 
> >>>>>> proposed patches in 
> >>>>>> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-05/msg00554.html>. In the only place 
> >>>>>> where this new patch disagrees with that subset, it is correct (SayÄn) and the 
> >>>>>> earlier patch was wrong (SayÃn) because Emacs misguessed the that file's 
> >>>>>> comments' encoding. Thanks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks, pushed
> >>>>>
> >>>>> i've also downloaded your patch and applied the ChangeLog parts since
> >>>>> Roland already said those are "obvious"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> feel like splitting up the rest ?
> >>>>
> >>>> I do not think this patch fits in any category discussed where we should
> >>>> lift the hard freeze.  Please revert and commit again when 2.24 opens.
> >>>
> >>> yeah, both of these should have waited.  sorry about that.  usually
> >>> ChangeLog files are fairly exempt from rules due to their setup.
> >>>
> >>>> This is also valid for CL change (d2bb040b2a2f58b1ef80f01292bd722fce01d36a).
> >>>
> >>> i don't mind reverting this one since it seems to break the tst-regex
> >>> test.  but is reverting updates to comments in the localedata files
> >>> needed if nothing is broken ?
> >>
> >> For the comments which does not have any side effects I think it is not worth
> >> the trouble.
> > 
> > for clarity's sake, you still want me to revert both ?
> 
> Sorry if I was not clear, I think only the one that triggered the issues with
> tests should be reverted.

i've done that now.  sorry again.

we should fix tst-regex imo to use a dedicated file or generate its own
rather than rely on something like ChangeLog files ... we've generally
operated under the assumption that the content of these aren't terribly
important, and this test violates that.
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]