On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 03:56:26PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On 15.11.2015 15:46, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 03:24:19PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: > >> On 15.11.2015 10:09, John Marino wrote: > >> ISO8859-1 locales are legacy even if obsoleted in modern world (I agree > >> with that). Lots of ports (even at configure stage!) have checks for > >> them. Since we generate locales from CLDR now, it will be no cost to > >> bring all 8859-1 back to not violate POLA and not fix every failing port. > >> > > Exp-run have been made and no ports were failing with the removed locales. > > There is soft-fail, configure just marks that locales are not supported > and use "C". Sorry I don't remember port names where I saw it right now > and don't have a time to search for them right now too. Soft-fails (like > in tcl with nl_langinfo) are almost impossible to detect excepting > specific situation happens or source code inspection. Do we ever need > them when there is no harm to keep 8859-1 locales?
Is it ok if I readd those locales as aliases on 8859-15? Best regards, Bapt
Description: PGP signature