Bug#172439: Bug#156386: patch to fix this bug 172439 - nope
At Sun, 22 Dec 2002 02:09:20 +0900,
Masato Taruishi wrote:
>
> At Sun, 22 Dec 2002 01:32:53 +0900,
> GOTO Masanori wrote:
>
> > > > > Actually, your patch doesn't fix bug #172439. The problem is in the
> > > > > postinst script. If /etc/locale.gen exists, bug XXX GENERATED XXX is not
> > > > > present in it, postint won't touch /etc/locale.gen.
> > > >
> > > > Oh, sorry. I misunderstood that these reports are the same bugs.
> > >
> > > Agh, Jeff remove the Closes: from changelog...
> > >
> > > > > I think this whole locale.postinst magic is quite confusing and should
> > > > > be removed.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think so. I guess it's better config simply
> > > > overwrote /etc/locale.gen no-matter-what or prompt in config
> > > > that XXGENERATEDXX is not found or something like that.
> > >
> > > "Prompting in config" is good idea. locale.gen is in /etc/,
> > > so overwriting /etc/locale.gen is not fine.
> >
> > I discussed with Masato Taruishi on IRC, and he suggested and taught
> > what was the problem (thanks Masato!). I summarize this issue:
> >
> > * This bug is caused by not only locales but also localeconf.
> > * locales makes /etc/locale.gen with XXGENERATEDXX.
> > * localeconf also makes /etc/locale.gen with another way
> > (### BEGIN DEBCONF SECTION FOR localeconf).
> > * Thus if you used localeconf, then you use locales debconf,
> > you can't generate /etc/locale.gen properly.
>
> Actually, Nagy's report is a good sumary.
Yes, it's my memorandum. Thanks Naby and Masato :)
> > To resolve this bug, some idea is come up.
> >
> > (1) localeconf simply put XXGENERATEDXX into /etc/locale.gen, or
> > something to do.
>
> localeconf doesn't replace all the /etc/locale.gen, but
> between (### BEGIN DEBCONF SECTION FOR localeconf) and
> (### END DEBCONF SECTION FOR localeconf). So normally,
> XXGENERATEDXX should remain.
>
> The following story represents the situation:
>
> 1) apt-get install locales
> 2) rm /etc/locale.gen
> 3) apt-get install localeconf
> 4) dpkg-reconfigure locales
Hmm... I want to know how to reappear this phenomenon...
Handly removal is rere, IMHO.
> > (2) locales simply overwrites /etc/locale.gen if XXGENERATEDXX is not
> > present.
> > (3) locales.config grep-s XXGENERATEDXX is present in /etc/locales.gen.
> > If there is no XXGENERATEDXX text, locales warns.
> >
> > I think (1) is the best solution. This bug is the conflict between
>
> I think (2) is better. locales doesn't need to check XXX GENERATED XXX
> entirely.
The reason why XXXGENERATEDXXX presents is that user wants to change
/etc/locale.gen and they don't want to generate locale data
explicitly. Simply overwriting /etc/locale.gen pluders such indication
method from users.
> However, this solution causes another bug, i.e. locales removes
> localeconf settings.
Well, that's right. Obviously locales and localeconf conflicts over the
/etc/locale.gen. So, (2) is not good, I think.
> > locales and localeconf. /etc/locale.gen is originally locales package
> > file, but localeconf overwrites unsafe method.
> > I would like to reassign this bug to localeconf. Is this OK?
>
> Actually, this bug is of locales itself.
No, due to mixture between locales and localeconf, thus not only
locales but also localeconf. Locales has configuration interface using
debconf, and has locale database. localeconf has only another
configuration interface, but does not have locale database.
> summary - asks for locale settings, but doesn't create /etc/locale.gen.
And users do not get proper locales settings.
They only want to work dpkg-reconfigure.
> After we solve this problem, another problem occurs between localeconf
> and locales.
We have to resolve these bugs at the same time, or at least we show
the answer how to fix in future. Only asking for locale setting way
as you wrote is not perfect. Hacking localeconf is needed.
In addition, localeconf is apparently optional package made by
Progeny, I don't want to mind their bugs.
Reassigning this bug to localeconf is the notification.
We should cooperate resolving this bug. What am I missing?
-- gotom
Reply to: