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.
-- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
