Hi, On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 10:02:25 AM EST Simon Josefsson via wrote: > tis 2022-03-08 klockan 10:28 +0000 skrev Tobias Geerinckx-Rice: > > Hullo Simon, > > > > Simon Josefsson via <help-guix@gnu.org> wrote: > > > First, I wonder if this is optimal. There must be many machines > > > (servers and embedded) where having all locales installed on is > > > wasteful, but where it is useful to have the C.UTF-8 and/or > > > en_US.UTF-8 > > > installed, to get minimal working UTF-8 support. Making this hard > > > to > > > achieve for users seems unhelpful to me. I understand the > > > motivation > > > for the patch > > > > I don't think you do, if that's what you thought it was ;-) > > Sorry I was unclear -- I reckon the motivation for the patch was that > the semantics with the old glibc-utf8-locales package was confusing > (not containing all UTF-8 locales). Still, I think the old package did > provide some useful aspect which is now lost, and has to be worked > around with more complex logic. Offering a newer more simple solution > is what I'm asking for. Meanwhile I'm happy to use the more complex > solution that you helped me with (below). >
Would it make any sense to define a `glibc-utf8-locales` package that actually does include all of the UTF-8 locales? In hindsight, it seems like it might have been better to have a more gradual transition from recommending `glibc-utf8-locales` in the docs to removing it, if that required everyone to update their configurations. (I haven't had a problem personally, though.) -Philip
