From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with SMTP id 8029bb9b for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 22:06:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 5914 invoked by uid 550); 19 Feb 2020 22:06:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 5896 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2020 22:06:15 -0000 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 17:06:03 -0500 From: Rich Felker To: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20200219220603.GH1663@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <543bcfcc-41f8-6960-8b6a-8e7fd5f01a01@adelielinux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [musl] Locale support considered harmful noise On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 09:28:10PM +0000, Jacob Welsh wrote: > On Tue, 18 Feb 2020, A. Wilcox wrote: > > >Why do you not believe that musl could provide any of these features > >using clear and concise code? > > I fully expect it could. The point at issue however is whether it > should be done at all. > > >I have been personally impacted by the lack of LC_COLLATE support. > > I have been personally "impacted" by its presence in glibc, but > perhaps I'm not the sort of "real world" user whose needs you would > like to represent. You avoid this by not setting LANG, LC_COLLATE, or LC_ALL in your environment, or by ensuring that the one that takes precedence yields a result of C or C.UTF-8 for the LC_COLLATE category. Plenty of users, myself included, prefer codepoint order for directory listings and such. This does not conflict in any way with providing support for other collation orders that are useful for things like sorting natural-language CSV tables, etc. > >In fact, musl is *not* conformant to the POSIX standard *because* > >it does not implement the requisite locale support. > > We're prepared to fork POSIX or any other document that proves > necessary. Not like it's hard. No comment. Rich