locales, nls - supportable or not?

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Nov 15 05:20:50 PST 2006

Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> The problem is that the wrong answer is given to the original poster by 
> TWO editors, and nobody corrected them. On this basis, I declare that 
> locale issues are not really supportable (and DIY is right in ignoring 
> them), and demand immediate removal of all UTF-8 related patches and 
> instructions from LFS and BLFS (and putting back the words like "UTF-8 
> does not work and requires substantial undocumented modifications to the 
> build process"). It is better to be honest and don't claim non-existent 
> support.

Where exactly is this "non-existent" support claimed? Where does LFS or 
BLFS say 'if you have UTF-8 or locale related issues, you are guaranteed 
support on our lists'? In fact, I don't think anyone is guaranteed 
support on any topic in the lists - it's a matter of those who have time 
and who (hopefully) know the answer piping up and responding.

I understand where you're coming from, Alexander, but I don't think 
removing all the hard work you put into it is the answer. The work you 
did was a large step in the right direction. True, it would be better if 
more developers had a fuller understanding of locale issues (likely a 
result of lack of incentive as English works out-of-the-box), but as it 
is, the energy of LFS/BLFS as a whole seems to be waning somewhat. 
Asking the developers to put forth extra work to go in a direction that 
seems to be 2 steps backwards - it just doesn't seem likely to happen.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list