Re: Are we going with X_LOCALE or not?
Kaz Sasayama <Kaz.Sasayama@hypercore.co.jp> writes:
> I was surprised when a new 126.96.36.199 version of X packages
> were released, because it defined X_LOCALE even with the
> libc6 version. So I ask:
> Are we going with X_LOCALE for any later version of libc6,
> or just for a version that does not support full i18n?
> It may be OK to define X_LOCALE if it becomes the standard
> of X Window System on Linux with libc6 and it won't change
> even when libc6 with full i18n support is released.
> A problem of changing X_LOCALE definition is it brings
> binary incompatibility of X libraries. A program compiled
> without X_LOCALE cannot use i18n support of X libraries with
> X_LOCALE, and a program with X_LOCALE may not run with X
> libraries without X_LOCALE. If we would have only static X
> libraries, it would not be a large problem, but we have
> dynamic X libraries. So it should be discussed soon.
In particular, this breaks compatibility with other distributions.
What exactly is the story here? I thought locale was supposed to be
fixed in libc6?
If the problem is just with asian locales, can libc6 be fixed? It
really would be nice to have compatibility between distributions.