On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 10:02:26PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On 19.06.2016 20:21, Andrey Chernov wrote: > > On 19.06.2016 20:10, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 08:05:30PM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: > >>> On 19.06.2016 19:52, Andrey Chernov wrote: > >>>> On 19.06.2016 19:47, Andrey Chernov wrote: > >>>>> On 19.06.2016 18:49, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 04:52:34PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 07:57:49AM +0300, Andrey Chernov wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 19.06.2016 6:44, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Log: > >>>>>>>>> - Prefer to use %d over %e where the day of the month should be > >>>>>>>>> zero > >>>>>>>>> filled. > >>>>>>>>> - Since %e means the day of the month as well, regard %e as same > >>>>>>>>> as %d > >>>>>>>>> in md_order. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Nonsense doubled formats in sr_*_RS locales and nonsense md_order > >>>>>>>> there too. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Crap I'll dig into it, thanks for spotting it. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>> Bapt > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Should be fixed by: > >>>>>> https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/locale-triple-components.diff > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The perl script generating the locales was badly handling locales with > >>>>>> 3 > >>>>>> components, fixed now. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sorry about that > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>> Bapt > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> sr locales are badly named before anything else, proper format is > >>>>> language[_COUNTRY][.encoding][@variant] > >>>>> I.e. > >>>>> sr_RS.UTF-8@Latn > >>>>> sr_RS.ISO8859-2@Latn > >>>>> sr_RS.ISO8859-t@Cyrl > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't know, if out utilities (f.e. locale(1)) can handle @variant > >>>>> suffix. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> =sr_RS.ISO8859-5@Cyrl > >>>> =our, and not utilities only but libc too > >>> > >>> Since right now we have only single @variant per each encoding, and no > >>> @variant for other locales, we can just drop it and use right names like: > >>> sr_RS.UTF-8 > >> > >> We have 2 for the above the Cyrl version and the Latn version > >> > >>> sr_RS.ISO8859-2 > >>> sr_RS.ISO8859-5 > >> > >> We can make aliases easily for that is that is what people want, not the > >> we have > >> the same for other locales: > >> > >> zh_Hans_CN.GB18030 > >> zh_Hans_CN.GB2312 > >> zh_Hans_CN.GBK > >> zh_Hans_CN.UTF-8 > >> zh_Hans_CN.eucCN > >> zh_Hant_HK.UTF-8 > >> zh_Hant_TW.Big5 > >> zh_Hant_TW.UTF-8 > >> > >> With some aliases for some of the previously existing ones: > >> zh_TW.Big5 > >> zh_TW.UTF-8 > >> zh_CN.GB18030 > >> zh_CN.GB2312 > >> zh_CN.GBK > >> zh_CN.UTF-8 > >> zh_CN.eucCN > >> zh_HK.UTF-8 > >> > >> Some of the new locales (that didn't exist before) I have only imported > >> the new > >> name format: > >> kk_Cyrl_KZ.UTF-8 > >> mn_Cyrl_MN.UTF-8 > >> sr_Cyrl_RS.ISO8859-5 > >> sr_Cyrl_RS.UTF-8 > >> sr_Latn_RS.ISO8859-2 > >> sr_Latn_RS.UTF-8 > >> > >> I would prefer staying on the new syntax given it is allowed by some RFC > >> and it > >> is slowly being adopted everywhere else. > >> > >> Btw another RFC: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5646.txt > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Bapt > >> > > > > Old POSIX don't use RFC 5646, there are ISO-639 two-letter codes. When > > encodings are different, there is no needs to specify variants, they > > have meaning only for the same encoding. > > > > > > I found POSIX reference about @-syntax: > [language[_territory][.codeset][@modifier]] > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap08.html > It says nothing about language, territory or codeset standards. > > They comes from another standard, ISO 15897: > "8. Natural language, as specified in ISO 639 > 9. Territory, as two-letter form of ISO 3166" > I can't find there something about codeset/charmap standartization, but > perhaps I just overlook some reference. >
Thanks a lot for that reference I wonder how I failed at finding it, I read twice the locale definition in opengroup documents. I have found yet proof in the code, but from my testings (using nl_langinfo()) I can see that the @modifier is properly supported. I have 2 proposal then: 1/ Keep the current version and add aliases with "@" for the one in variants 2/ Rename all the variants we have now into the POSIX version with "@" What do you think? Best regards, Bapt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
