Bug 21806 - Wrong LC_NAME in Arabic Locals
Summary: Wrong LC_NAME in Arabic Locals
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: glibc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: localedata (show other bugs)
Version: 2.26
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2017-07-21 04:11 UTC by Akhilesh Kumar
Modified: 2017-10-21 08:20 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:
fweimer: security-

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Akhilesh Kumar 2017-07-21 04:11:43 UTC 

    


    


      



        
          Comment 1
        

        
          Akhilesh Kumar

        

        
        

        
          2017-07-21 04:19:35 UTC
        

      






https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-07/msg00765.html
Ref Google and UAE Travel book 
Ms  -> الآنسة
Miss-> يغيب
Mr  -> السيد
Mrs -> السيدة

    


    


      



        
          Comment 2
        

        
          Akhilesh Kumar

        

        
        

        
          2017-07-21 07:50:23 UTC
        

      






>     diff --git a/localedata/locales/ar_EG b/localedata/locales/ar_EG
>     index 612b8fa..1b8c5d4 100644
>     --- a/localedata/locales/ar_EG
>     +++ b/localedata/locales/ar_EG
>     @@ -173,15 +173,13 @@ END LC_PAPER
>      LC_NAME
>      % This is the ISO_IEC TR14652 Locale definition for the
>      % LC_NAME category.
>     -%
>      name_fmt    "%p%t%f%t/
>      %g"
>     -name_gen    "-san"
>     -name_mr     "Mr."
>     -name_mrs    "Mrs."
>     -name_miss   "Miss."
>     -name_ms     "Ms."
>     -
>     +name_gen    ""
>     +name_mr     "السيد"
>     +name_mrs    "السيدة"
>     +name_miss   "يغيب"
>     +name_ms     "الآنسة"
>      END LC_NAME
>  
>  
> Where did you get this from?
>  
 Used google translator also Verified with person who knows Arabic

    


    


      



        
          Comment 3
        

        
          Akhilesh Kumar

        

        
        

        
          2017-07-28 16:15:23 UTC
        

      






I again reconfirmed  these changes are correct and I think we can commit these changes

    


    


      



        
          Comment 4
        

        
          Wei-Lun Chao

        

        
        

        
          2017-08-11 02:03:59 UTC
        

      






After checking ar_* I found:

ar_EG:
name_fmt    "<U0025><U0070><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066><U0025><U0074>/
<U0025><U0067>"

ar_SA:
name_fmt    "<U0025><U0064><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0067><U0025><U0074>/
<U0025><U006D><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066>"

Which one is correct, or both? Arabic as a macro-language may have the same problem like Chinese.

    


    


      



        
          Comment 5
        

        
          Joseph Myers

        

        
        

        
          2017-08-28 16:34:38 UTC
        

      






Note comment lost in system crash and restore from backup.

https://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-bugs/2017-08/msg00366.html

    


    


      



        
          Comment 6
        

        
          Mike FABIAN

        

        
        

        
          2017-10-21 08:20:37 UTC
        

      






(In reply to Wei-Lun Chao from comment #4)
> After checking ar_* I found:
> 
> ar_EG:
> name_fmt    "<U0025><U0070><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066><U0025><U0074>/
> <U0025><U0067>"
> 
> ar_SA:
> name_fmt    "<U0025><U0064><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0067><U0025><U0074>/
> <U0025><U006D><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066>"
> 
> Which one is correct, or both? Arabic as a macro-language may have the same
> problem like Chinese.

Yes, I think the same.

I don’t want to apply this change to all Arabic locales, there 
could be differences between the Arabic locales, we would need
to have better references. I guess it is quite likely that these
strings should be different for different Arabic locales.