Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:17:38PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote:
[snip]
What I do not understand is why my two-pass builds from texlive
worked on x86_64 but not on i686. For xindy-2.5.1 it is possible
that something changed (or, at very long odds, maybe something in
perl), but now that I understand the problem I'm off to ensure that
all my scripts export LC_ALL=C.
The problem is during the build, so a user building as themself in
a UTF-8 locale need tso do this. I guess that jhalfs builds using
the 'C' locale ?
I believe it does. grep for LC_ALL in the jhalfs directory.
Do we have a preferred form of words for telling people that they
need to do that ? e.g. mention it in the note, somehow save LC_ALL
if different, set LC_ALL, build, restore ? And is POSIX the same as
'C' for LC_ALL, and if so, do we prefer that ?
C and POSIX are synonymous. In LFS we use LC_ALL=POSIX in Section 4.4, but
there are places where
If you change LC_ALL in a script, you don't need to unset it, but we don't
assume that. For the book, you can use either
SAVE_LC_ALL=$LC_ALL
LC_ALL=POSIX (or C)
...
LC_ALL=$SAVE_LC_ALL
or
bash
LC_ALL=POSIX (or C)
...
exit
It works out to about the same.
Does this mean we can get ticket #5926 closed?
When the text is changed. I won't be doing that today, and since
I've passed the ticket back, anybody is welcome to take it.
Using bash if it is not required will probably upset Igor 8-P
Xindy seems, to me, to be one of the few packages which now has to
be built in the C or POSIX locale. I have to admit that I thought
my root user used to live in those, but obviously he or she does not
live there now.
I'm just creating tickets for some updated perl moduless (did not
realise how many I now build to support testsuites on other perl
modules). Will test _those_ in my upcoming build.
Thanks for your efforts to get towards testing xindy, I'm sure you
can find other shortcomings in my texlive hacks.
Oh, and I finally got onto the right path by using debug switches
on texindy, intstead of xindy - most of the log was spurious
errors in both the good and the bad runs.
Sounds good. If you could take back the ticket and do the fixes at your
convenience (no rush), I'd appreciate it.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
