This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

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

nl_langinfo(CODESET) question

To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>
Subject: nl_langinfo(CODESET) question
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 11:13:16 +0200
Cc: Glibc hackers <libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com>
Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>

Hi!

If setlocale does not find locale with the requested charset, then it just
uses the charset stored in the locale, eventhough libc is able to
transliterate.
I'm wondering whether
setlocale (LC_ALL, "cs_CZ.UTF-8");
shouldn't result in nl_langinfo(CODESET) == "UTF-8" as opposed to
"ISO-8859-2" even if the installed locale is latin2 only.
I know I can use $OUTPUT_CHARSET, am just wondering what's the proper
behaviour of setlocale in this case.
I've tried this on Solaris and if I specify a codeset that is not installed
for a selected locale, nl_langinfo(CODESET) returns "646" as opposed to e.g.
"ISO8859-2" which it returns otherwise.

Or do all programs which wonder about the character set used have to:
charset = getenv("OUTPUT_CHARSET"); if (!charset) charset = nl_langinfo(CODESET);
?

	Jakub

Follow-Ups:
- Re: nl_langinfo(CODESET) question
  - From: Ulrich Drepper

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