Re: Should all udeb binaries use UTF8 libraries?

[Philip Blundell <pb@nexus.co.uk>]

On Sun, 2003-01-26 at 09:47, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > > I've noticed some udebs require on libslang.so.1, while the cdebconf
> > > slang frontend require libslang.so.1-UTF8.  Should all udeb programs
> > > and libraries link with UTF8 versions of libraries, or should we leave
> > > it to the package maintainers?
> > 
> > I was kind of hoping that we would be able to do away with the non-UTF8
> > libraries altogether during the sarge development cycle.  Everything
> > should be linking against the UTF8 versions in absence of any compelling
> > reason to do differently.
> 
> me also thinks that should be the case, except for an oddball 
> (whiptail.so, which provides utf-8 verison and non-utf8 version),
> or unless the packages doesn't work with utf-8 version (which is 
> rather unlikely, or broken).

Well, the obvious way to go about that is to rename the current
slang1-utf8-dev to slang1-dev so that package builds start using it by
default.  I'm not sure if there are any other libraries like newt that
would need to make a coordinated switch.

I've copied this to the slang maintainer, to see what his thoughts are
on the matter.

p.