Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /etc/locale vs /etc/env.d/02locale?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 02:46:45AM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote Have you tried localepurge? A couple of notes/questions... 1) localepurge deletes the contents of subfolders in /usr/share/locale but leaves the empty subfolders present. Is it OK to delete the empty subfolders? 2) I notice that localepurge did *NOT* delete the contents of LC_MESSAGES in the following subfolders... ast be@latin ca@valencia crh dz en@shaw io kg km lg mai mg my nds si sr@latin uz@cyrillic -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /etc/locale vs /etc/env.d/02locale?
On Sunday 19 June 2011 21:46:05 Walter Dnes wrote: 1) localepurge deletes the contents of subfolders in /usr/share/locale but leaves the empty subfolders present. Is it OK to delete the empty subfolders? I assume so, though I haven't bothered. Why not try it and see? 2) I notice that localepurge did *NOT* delete the contents of LC_MESSAGES in the following subfolders... ast be@latin ca@valencia crh dz en@shaw io kg km lg mai mg my nds si sr@latin uz@cyrillic Those don't look like locale names to me: uz@cyrillic? What locale is that? Or en@shaw? Who is shaw? Those two at least don't exist on my system. -- Rgds Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /etc/locale vs /etc/env.d/02locale?
On Saturday 18 June 2011 01:50:12 walt wrote: I've tried to prevent the installation of many many unneeded megabytes of translation files in /usr/share/locale/* but I've never succeeded. ATM I have 101MB of *.mo translation files in /usr/share/locale even though I deleted all of them less than a month ago. I unset the 'nls' useflag in the hope it would solve the problem, but no joy. Have you tried localepurge? -- Rgds Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: /etc/locale vs /etc/env.d/02locale?
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@arcor.de wrote: On 06/16/2011 06:45 PM, Mark Knecht wrote: Is there a simple explanation concerning the difference between the two locales I have seen on Gentoo machines? 1) /etc/locale, as specified in the installation documents 2) /etc/env.d/02locale as has been discussed on the list recently There is no /etc/locale. I assume you mean /etc/locale.gen. I did. thanks. That one only contains the locales for glibc. You should not specify env vars there. You only list raw locales. Mine for example has these contents: en_US ISO-8859-1 en_US.UTF-8 UTF-8 As does mine. /etc/env.d/02locale is of a different format. It's executed as a script, so you set your locale-specific env vars there. You only need LANG actually, and possibly LC_COLLATE. The whole contents of mine: LANG=en_US.UTF-8 LC_COLLATE=C I had the first line but not the second which I've added. I think the root of my question is really the (possibly) unfortunately use of the word 'locale' for the glibc stuff. I understand the concept of locales for the system and users, but why does glibc need locales which are possibly different from those in use on a system by users? I can make up reasons, like someone from Japan logs into my server to do work and needs something to use Japanese locales, but he could likely set those up in .bashrc or something. What is glibc doing with them? Thanks, Mark
