Le mercredi 08 juin 2005 à 20:06 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit : > On Jun 08, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > FFS! When will people learn to not mess with other cultures they know > > > nothing about? > > > Feel free to advocate a different default charset for *your* locale, but > > > do not pretend to know what's better for other locales. > > As we have hundreds of broken packages assuming e.g. that the filenames > > on disk are encoded in the current locale's character set, the only way > > to make them interact properly with other applications is to set a > > UTF8-locale. > Wrong. The problem is packages which need to interact with text files, > mail and usenet messages generated by broken software, and for which > assuming UTF-8 would be totally wrong.
Please come up with real-life examples. Most mail software in Debian, as well as a good share of our text editors, can deal with several character sets. The only limitation is nano, our default text editor. Apart from it, I don't have anything broken with the UTF8 locale I've been using for a year. On the other side, I can come up with a great bunch of applications that break with a non-UTF8 locale, starting with bash and ls. > Again, do not mess with cultures you do not understand. No comment. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
