On 29/09/15 06:54, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 09/26/2015 06:24 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Furthermore, the function in question returns EINVAL in other similar >> cases–e.g., when libc 2.22 loads LC_COLLATE data from libc 2.21. > > If you change this particular case to EINVAL, what does the user see > as a result of this change? Do they get a non-zero exit code from > `localedef --list-archive` along with an error written out to stderr? > > This is the kind of change I'm expecting. If we are removing an assertion, > we should be replacing it with something meaningful and verifying that > meaningful change. > > You need not change any of the other cases you've found that return EINVAL, > we can update those incrementally, but for this one change you're making > we should fix it as best we can. >
If I am reading this correctly, the change to from an abort to EINVAL would be fine if it is accompanied by a change to localedef --list-archive. Is that correct? A solution to this would be great given we now run into this assert with locale archives built with different glibc builds along the 2.22 release branch. Allan
