Bug#312927: glibc: Please use UTF-8 as the default locale codeset
At Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:45:00 +0100,
Roger Leigh wrote:
> The following patch
> reorders SUPPORTED when embedding the list in locales.config, so that
> UTF-8 locales are listed before all other locales, which are placed at
> the end of the list.
The concept of your patch seems fine for me. I heard that
debian-installer BoF in debconf5 decided to switch UTF-8 as default
locale in installer. So normal users who use just debian-installer
will move to UTF-8 in etch.
However, I don't know it's nice idea to put all UTF-8 locales at the
top. Actually many users have not switched to UTF-8 yet, so they want
to select both UTF-8 and obsolete charsets at the same time. So,
instead, I would like to change as follows:
- The current order of SUPPORTED list (appeared at the first screen
of dpkg-reconfigure locales) is for example:
iw_IL ISO-8859-8
iw_IL.UTF-8 UTF-8
ja_JP.EUC-JP EUC-JP
ja_JP.UTF-8 UTF-8
But the new order of SUPPORTED list is for example:
iw_IL.UTF-8 UTF-8
iw_IL ISO-8859-8
ja_JP.UTF-8 UTF-8
ja_JP.EUC-JP EUC-JP
- Selecting system standard locale (appeared at the second screen of
dpkg-reconfigure locales) lists UTF-8 prior than other charmaps
for example:
iw_IL.UTF-8 UTF-8
iw_IL ISO-8859-8
ja_JP.UTF-8 UTF-8
ja_JP.EUC-JP EUC-JP
I would like to put this version to locales package. I welcome your
comments and patches.
> I've also added a small note to the debconf
> template to make the user aware that UTF-8 locales are recommended, but
> the other locales are still available should they be needed.
>
> --- glibc-2.3.2.ds1.old/debian/debhelper.in/locales.templates 2005-06-10 11:04:53.000000000 +0100
> +++ glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/debhelper.in/locales.templates 2005-06-10 21:35:57.000000000 +0100
> @@ -8,6 +8,10 @@
> Choose which locales to generate. The selection will be saved to
> `/etc/locale.gen', which you can also edit manually (you need to run
> `locale-gen' afterwards).
> + .
> + UTF-8 locales are recommended. Locales using old national character sets
> + are provided for backwards-compatibility, but should not be used unless
> + strictly required.
I don't know whether we should recommend use of UTF-8, because
selecting localedata via locales debconf depends on user's decision.
IMHO we have no authority to push the claim of "should not be used
unless strictly required".
Regards,
-- gotom
Reply to: