This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix bo_CN and bo_IN locales
- From: Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net>
- To: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>
- Cc: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:59:34 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix bo_CN and bo_IN locales
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20130513013446 dot GA21407 at hall dot aurel32 dot net> <51908772 dot 4060906 at suse dot com> <20130513162937 dot GS20323 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx> <20130513200241 dot GE4054 at hall dot aurel32 dot net>
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:02:41PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:29:37PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 08:25:54AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> > > On 05/13/2013 03:34 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > >bo_CN and bo_IN have an empty name_fmt field, causing localedef to fail:
> > > >
> > > >$ localedef -c -f UTF-8 -i bo_IN bo_IN.UTF-8
> > > >LC_NAME: field `name_fmt' must not be empty
> > > >
> > > >While I don't know what are the correct values for this locale, I think
> > > >this should be fixed, to not break localedef and the tools using it. I
> > > >therefore suggest to change the value to "???" as it is already done for
> > > >the az_AZ and tt_RU locales.
> > >
> > > Yes, this looks like the best approach. I wanted to suggest
> > > contacting the authors but there're none given in the file, so go
> > > ahead,
> > The whole model of LC_NAME is unsuitable to Tibetan names, which are
> > not composed of a given and family name, but usually two given names,
> > which are meant to be kept in a fixed order (first, second) when both
> > used, and it varies from person to person which name they use when
> > going by a single name. Thus, the choice of name_fmt depends on how
> > the user has coerced Tibetan names into a model that's unsuitable for
> > representing them. There does not seem to be any standard for this.
> > In a Western or Indian context, the first and second name seem usually
> > to be treated as first and last, but this is mildly problematic
> > because at least some Tibetans also have family names which were not
> > traditionally used as part of a name, but which increasingly many
> > people are choosing to adopt when living in places where having a
> > family name is expected.
> > In a Chinese context, it's a lot more ambiguous whether the first and
> > second name will be mapped to (first,family) or (family,first). I've
> > seen it done both ways, and I've also seen people's names turned
> > backwards because it was originally done one way then rendered the
> > opposite.
> > In any case, "???" does not seem like a good value for name_fmt. I
> > would probably just go with first,family until somebody opens a bug
> > report asking for it to be changed...
> What is sure is that we can't leave an empty name_fmt, causing tools to
> break. If you think "???" is not a good value, could you please provide
> a patch that set another non empty value as you suggested above?
Have you been able to progress on that?
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73