Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Landry Breuil]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:40:47PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:32:21PM +0100, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> > Tinker  writes:
> > 
> > > On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:
> > >> Tinker  writes:
> > >>
> > >>> What would the decision be based on?
> > >>
> > >> I think that those points should be enough.
> > >> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
> > >>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
> > >
> > > I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!
> > 
> > I'm glad to hear that you want to do Unicode normalization using ICU,
> > that is not a valid answer to what I said above.
> > 
> > We have one report here:
> > 
> >   http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2
> > 
> > jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
> > aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
> > boost.  The only benefit I can see so far is to have a boost package
> > similar to other distros.
> 
> I wonder if adding ICU support to boost would unbreak manik.

On that topic i've filed https://github.com/mapnik/mapnik/issues/3202
upstream but didnt thought about that boost/icu thing.

Either way, touching boost... here be dragons.

Landry

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

Wait, in the interim, the brave user who wants ICU support system-wide 
now, and who has ICU already installed in the system, can just switch 
the "--without-icu" part to "--with-icu" in 
/usr/ports/devel/boost/Makefile , and do "make; make install" right?



That will not break binary compatibility with precompiled packages, the 
only thing would be that if some package is specifically incompatible 
with Boost's ICU support, it'd go into undefined behavior, right?



On 2015-12-17 02:40, Landry Breuil wrote:

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:40:47PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:32:21PM +0100, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas 
wrote:

> Tinker  writes:
>
> > On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:
> >> Tinker  writes:
> >>
> >>> What would the decision be based on?
> >>
> >> I think that those points should be enough.
> >> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
> >>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
> >
> > I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!
>
> I'm glad to hear that you want to do Unicode normalization using ICU,
> that is not a valid answer to what I said above.
>
> We have one report here:
>
>   http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2
>
> jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
> aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
> boost.  The only benefit I can see so far is to have a boost package
> similar to other distros.

I wonder if adding ICU support to boost would unbreak manik.


On that topic i've filed https://github.com/mapnik/mapnik/issues/3202
upstream but didnt thought about that boost/icu thing.

Either way, touching boost... here be dragons.

Landry

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:27:07AM +0800, Tinker wrote:
> Wait, in the interim, the brave user who wants ICU support system-wide now,
> and who has ICU already installed in the system, can just switch the
> "--without-icu" part to "--with-icu" in /usr/ports/devel/boost/Makefile ,
> and do "make; make install" right?

$ make clean=all
$ make
$ make fake
$ make port-lib-depends-check
# fix WANTLIB
$ make update-plist
$ make reinstall

> 
> 
> That will not break binary compatibility with precompiled packages, the only
> thing would be that if some package is specifically incompatible with
> Boost's ICU support, it'd go into undefined behavior, right?
> 
> 
> On 2015-12-17 02:40, Landry Breuil wrote:
> >On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:40:47PM +0100, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> >>On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:32:21PM +0100, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
> >>wrote:
> >>> Tinker  writes:
> >>>
> >>> > On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:
> >>> >> Tinker  writes:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> What would the decision be based on?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I think that those points should be enough.
> >>> >> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
> >>> >>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
> >>> >
> >>> > I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!
> >>>
> >>> I'm glad to hear that you want to do Unicode normalization using ICU,
> >>> that is not a valid answer to what I said above.
> >>>
> >>> We have one report here:
> >>>
> >>>   http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2
> >>>
> >>> jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
> >>> aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
> >>> boost.  The only benefit I can see so far is to have a boost package
> >>> similar to other distros.
> >>
> >>I wonder if adding ICU support to boost would unbreak manik.
> >
> >On that topic i've filed https://github.com/mapnik/mapnik/issues/3202
> >upstream but didnt thought about that boost/icu thing.
> >
> >Either way, touching boost... here be dragons.
> >
> >Landry
> 

-- 
Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[David Coppa]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
 wrote:

> We have one report here:
>
>   http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2
>
> jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
> aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
> boost.

audio/ncmpcpp (since version 0.7) can make use of it:

checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes
checking for ICU... yes
checking whether boost.regex was compiled with ICU support... no

Ciao!
David

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Antoine Jacoutot]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:32:21PM +0100, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> Tinker  writes:
> 
> > On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:
> >> Tinker  writes:
> >>
> >>> What would the decision be based on?
> >>
> >> I think that those points should be enough.
> >> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
> >>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
> >
> > I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!
> 
> I'm glad to hear that you want to do Unicode normalization using ICU,
> that is not a valid answer to what I said above.
> 
> We have one report here:
> 
>   http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2
> 
> jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
> aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
> boost.  The only benefit I can see so far is to have a boost package
> similar to other distros.

I wonder if adding ICU support to boost would unbreak manik.

-- 
Antoine

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

On 2015-12-16 18:23, Landry Breuil wrote:

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 06:10:17PM +0800, Tinker wrote:
Aha thank you very much for pointing these things out - great to know 
there

was a discussion about it.

Aha so maybe for OpenBSD 6.0 we'll have an ICU flavor at least.


Flavors in libraries are really a pain to handle, so we try to avoid
those.

Landry


(I understand that.)

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:

Tinker  writes:


What would the decision be based on?


I think that those points should be enough.
- good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
  Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?


I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!


E.g. within locale(BC_LOCALE_UTF8).

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_54_0/libs/locale/doc/html/group__convert.html

Boost.Locale requires Boost to be compiled with --with-icu , 
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_59_0/libs/locale/doc/html/index.html 
says:


 "In order to achieve this goal Boost.Locale uses 
the-state-of-the-art Unicode and Localization library: ICU - 
International Components for Unicode.


 Boost.Locale creates the natural glue between the C++ locales 
framework, iostreams, and the powerful ICU library."




(Then it continues "Boost.Locale provides non-ICU based localization 
support as well. It is based on the operating system native API or on 
the standard C++ library support. Sacrificing some less important 
features, Boost.Locale becomes less powerful but lighter and easier to 
deploy and use library."  - but, there's an issue here that the 
C++/OS-bundled unicode normalization may be incomplete or broken so this 
is why you want ICU.)




- someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential
  breakage.


Right, Kirill said you are looking into this already now



Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?


You tell us. ;)

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas]

Tinker  writes:

> On 2015-12-16 05:04, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:
>> Tinker  writes:
>>
>>> What would the decision be based on?
>>
>> I think that those points should be enough.
>> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
>>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
>
> I need normalize() to do Unicode normalization!

I'm glad to hear that you want to do Unicode normalization using ICU,
that is not a valid answer to what I said above.

We have one report here:

  http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144171504417490=2

jirib didn't confirm that ICU was the only thing needed to make his
aegisub port work, and to my knowledge no existing port requires ICU in
boost.  The only benefit I can see so far is to have a boost package
similar to other distros.

> E.g. within locale(BC_LOCALE_UTF8).
>
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_54_0/libs/locale/doc/html/group__convert.html
>
> Boost.Locale requires Boost to be compiled with --with-icu ,
> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_59_0/libs/locale/doc/html/index.html
> says:
>
>  "In order to achieve this goal Boost.Locale uses
> the-state-of-the-art Unicode and Localization library: ICU - 
> International Components for Unicode.
>
>  Boost.Locale creates the natural glue between the C++ locales
> framework, iostreams, and the powerful ICU library."
>
>
>
> (Then it continues "Boost.Locale provides non-ICU based localization
> support as well. It is based on the operating system native API or on
> the standard C++ library support. Sacrificing some less important
> features, Boost.Locale becomes less powerful but lighter and easier to
> deploy and use library."  - but, there's an issue here that the
> C++/OS-bundled unicode normalization may be incomplete or broken so this
> is why you want ICU.)
>
>> - someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential
>>   breakage.
>
> Right, Kirill said you are looking into this already now

In this thread I see no mail from Kirill saying this.  Who is "you" in
this sentence?

Back to thumb twiddling,

[...]

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

Aha thank you very much for pointing these things out - great to know 
there was a discussion about it.


Aha so maybe for OpenBSD 6.0 we'll have an ICU flavor at least.

I understand that the ICU support in Boost interfered with some other 
package so it wasn't completely untrivial to include and that's why you 
didn't do it already -


I think I'll try with that flavor as per the patch in the other email, 
on my machine, and let you know if I see any issue.


Thank you so much & happy holidays!
Tinker

On 2015-12-16 05:54, j...@wxcvbn.org wrote:

Stuart Henderson  writes:


On 2015/12/15 22:04, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:

Tinker  writes:

> What would the decision be based on?

I think that those points should be enough.
- good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
  Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
- someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for 
potential

  breakage.


And updating WANTLIB :-)


> Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?

You tell us. ;)


Also note that this port does have a maintainer.


Duh, indeed.  So please also discuss this with Brad.

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Landry Breuil]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 06:10:17PM +0800, Tinker wrote:
> Aha thank you very much for pointing these things out - great to know there
> was a discussion about it.
> 
> Aha so maybe for OpenBSD 6.0 we'll have an ICU flavor at least.

Flavors in libraries are really a pain to handle, so we try to avoid
those.

Landry

Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

Hi,

I need the ICU parts of Boost. And, I really guess internationalized 
stuff is becoming more and more popular.


Currently:

 /usr/ports/devel/boost$ grep -r icu *
 Makefile:   --without-icu \

Would you feel like changint that to --with-icu, and then adding "icu4c" 
as a dependency to boost as to provide for that?


Thanks!
Tinker

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Tinker]

What would the decision be based on?

Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?

I guess anyhow that it's fair to say that OpenBSD machines do process 
Unicode and not just Ascii and that the Unicode usecase only will grow 
with time.




On 2015-12-16 01:04, Kirill Bychkov wrote:

On Tue, December 15, 2015 19:48, Tinker wrote:

Hi,

I need the ICU parts of Boost. And, I really guess internationalized
stuff is becoming more and more popular.

Currently:

  /usr/ports/devel/boost$ grep -r icu *
  Makefile:   --without-icu \

Would you feel like changint that to --with-icu, and then adding 
"icu4c"

as a dependency to boost as to provide for that?

Thanks!
Tinker



Hi.
There was a discussion and patches [0] but still no decision yet.

[0] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144120909505095=2

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Kirill Bychkov]

On Tue, December 15, 2015 19:48, Tinker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need the ICU parts of Boost. And, I really guess internationalized
> stuff is becoming more and more popular.
>
> Currently:
>
>   /usr/ports/devel/boost$ grep -r icu *
>   Makefile:   --without-icu \
>
> Would you feel like changint that to --with-icu, and then adding "icu4c"
> as a dependency to boost as to provide for that?
>
> Thanks!
> Tinker
>
>
Hi.
There was a discussion and patches [0] but still no decision yet.

[0] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144120909505095=2

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas]

Stuart Henderson  writes:

> On 2015/12/15 22:04, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
>> Tinker  writes:
>> 
>> > What would the decision be based on?
>> 
>> I think that those points should be enough.
>> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
>>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
>> - someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential
>>   breakage.
>
> And updating WANTLIB :-)
>
>> > Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?
>> 
>> You tell us. ;)
>
> Also note that this port does have a maintainer.

Duh, indeed.  So please also discuss this with Brad.

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas]

Tinker  writes:

> What would the decision be based on?

I think that those points should be enough.
- good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
  Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
- someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential
  breakage.

> Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?

You tell us. ;)

> I guess anyhow that it's fair to say that OpenBSD machines do process
> Unicode and not just Ascii and that the Unicode usecase only will grow
> with time.
>
>
>
> On 2015-12-16 01:04, Kirill Bychkov wrote:
>> On Tue, December 15, 2015 19:48, Tinker wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I need the ICU parts of Boost. And, I really guess internationalized
>>> stuff is becoming more and more popular.
>>>
>>> Currently:
>>>
>>>   /usr/ports/devel/boost$ grep -r icu *
>>>   Makefile:   --without-icu \
>>>
>>> Would you feel like changint that to --with-icu, and then adding
>>> "icu4c"
>>> as a dependency to boost as to provide for that?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Tinker
>>>
>>>
>> Hi.
>> There was a discussion and patches [0] but still no decision yet.
>>
>> [0] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=144120909505095=2
>


-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE

Re: Please add ICU as dependency to Boost (i.e. change the "--without-icu" to "--with-icu") - thoughts?

[Stuart Henderson]

On 2015/12/15 22:04, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> Tinker  writes:
> 
> > What would the decision be based on?
> 
> I think that those points should be enough.
> - good reasons to use ICU in boost, not just "I need the ICU parts of
>   Boost.".  What would be the benefit for the ports tree?
> - someone has to do the work, and that includes checking for potential
>   breakage.

And updating WANTLIB :-)

> > Everyone just rolling thumbs or is there any real tradeoff?
> 
> You tell us. ;)

Also note that this port does have a maintainer.