On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 02:46:16AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > severity 386299 serious > thanks > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 06:14:55PM +0100, Marcin Owsiany wrote: > > > Unicode support in ekg2 is highly experimental and not yet supported > > upstream, therefore the debian package is built without UTF-8 support. > > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 05:56:17PM +0200, Tristan Seligmann wrote: > > > Attempting to run ekg2 yields the following: > > > Try running it in some iso-8859 locale. > > That's not an acceptable answer, given that almost all locales for etch will > be Unicode by default. This makes the package unreleasable. Of course, the > package seems to only be in experimental at all, so I don't see why you > would bother to downgrade the bug... It doesn't matter for ekg2, which will stay in experimental for quite a while I'm afraid, but it is important for at least two other of my packages (which are in etch) which don't support UTF-8 at all. And I'm reasonably sure they are not the only packages in etch which don't support UTF. Who decided that we should just drop them all? After all generating a non-UTF locale and setting an environment variable isn't a very difficult workaround? I mean, when has lack of UTF support become an RC-bug? Charset support is not even mentioned in the policy, other than for debian/changelog. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against UTF-8, but just dropping everything that doesn't support it, without a former warning, sounds ridiculous. regards, Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany <porridge@debian.org> http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature