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,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to