Chris Staub wrote:
I don't think anyone is debating that they aren't being forced to use
UTF-8 locales. However, the issue is that if you never do use a UTF-8
locale, then the UTF-8 code just sits there unnecessarily taking up
space. It isn't a question of whether it "works" - I *know* that
non-UTF-8 locales will work fine with UTF-8-enable LFS - it's that if
the extra disk space and memory being taking up is not needed, then it
shouldn't be there.
Well, at this point we definitely need two books, because:
1) addition of UTF-8 violated one important LFS policy: don't fix
non-important bugs (i.e., those invisible to at least one reader).
Changing this would make LFS a distro.
2) jhalfs needs a linear book.
3) there are readers that want UTF-8 enabled version of LFS.
So: please revert my patch from trunk, make a branch. The patch was
never really ready for merging, for non-technical reasons that realized
only now. If this unmerging is not done, I will waste time in flame wars
instead of fixing real bugs.
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
