continue to trouble shoot base iconv issues,
or try to stick with ports' converters/libiconv until FreeBSD 11?
Will use of both be somehow supported???
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Base-iconv-sort-of-replaces-libiconv-in-FreeBSD-10-tp5886786p5887307
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:32:07AM -0800, Robert_Burmeister wrote:
As I use the Gnome2 desktop, I am unclear as to the recommended best
practice.
Base iconv and ports libiconv conflict, so one or the other should be used.
See the commit made 3 days ago to glib20 port. Of particular interest
On Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:32:07 -0800 (PST) Robert_Burmeister wrote:
As I use the Gnome2 desktop, I am unclear as to the recommended best
practice.
Base iconv and ports libiconv conflict, so one or the other should be used.
FreeBSD 10 has been updated so that either base iconv or ports libiconv
of libiconv from
ports,
would help make port maintainers aware of iconv issues.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Base-iconv-sort-of-replaces-libiconv-in-FreeBSD-10-tp5886786.html
Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Robert_Burmeister
robert.burmeis...@utoledo.edu wrote:
While base iconv replaces libiconv in FreeBSD 10,
base iconv doesn't do utf-8 - wchar_t,
which is required by glib20, thus impacts thousands of ports.
An entry in the FreeBSD 10 Errata stating that
