On 7 Dec 2011, at 17:52, David Chisnall wrote: > > I think you got no volunteers because, as far as anyone else was concerned it > was already working, -fexec-charset was not required, and there was no clear > explanation of why it would be required.
I guess I hadn't considered that possibility since, at that point I had already had a couple of off-list complaints about this problem ... but of course people on-list would be looking at things from a different context. Now I've in the position of having a few complaints about compilers putting bad (ie non-utf8) literals in binaries, but also having a few complaints about the the solution I tried to put in place :-( > I am not sure how a configure check *in -base* affects anyone compiling > anything else. gnustep-make supports additional makefile fragments ... so gnustep-base configure can/does check for compiler capabilities and put additional flags in the makefile fragment used whenever code is built to link with base (almost all code in practice) ... > If the string literals are in their code, then this depends entirely on how > they compile their code, not how we compile -base. Base is built to require string literals to be utf8 at runtime ... we have no way of knowing how the compiler actually put the literals in the binary, so the idea was to make the compiler use utf8 by giving it the correct flags. This seems to fix the problem for the couple of cases I know of, but it now seems to have caused as much trouble or other people as it's solved ... because of compilers which don't support locale/character set stuff. I'd really like it if everyone just used utf-8, and we just documented that in theFAQ and HOWTO etc and said they must not use any other characterset, but I hate being prescriptive about how people use things. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
