This is the mail archive of the
libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: A locale question.
- To: drepper@cygnus.com
- Subject: Re: A locale question.
- From: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu)
- Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:30:25 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: libc-hacker@cygnus.com
>
> hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu) writes:
>
> > As I said, VSX4L0 only defines LC_CTYPE. localedef only created
> > LC_CTYPE and setlocale (LC_ALL, "VSX4L0") returns NULL. I think
> > it should be fixed.
>
> There is nothing wrong with setlocale. The problem is with localedef
> and this cannot be fixed easily. It has to generate the appropriate
> information for the missing categories and all this is handled in the
> rewrite of localedef.
>
> > lang1.src:int_curr_symbol "DDM "
>
> I don't know what this is for but perhaps it's the format for the
> non-existing currency of the non-existing GDR. In any case a bug in
> the testsuite since the current ISO 4217 does not list this name.
>
> > lang2.src:int_curr_symbol "FRF "
>
> You don't use glibc 2.1, obviously. You should.
>
I have one machine running 2.1 and the other running 2.0. The 2.0
machine is much faster than 2.1. Should I forget about the POSIX
testsuite on 2.0 and work on 2.1 instead? When 2.1 will be released
to public? If the gap between 2.0 and 2.1 is too long, I think we
should fix 2.0 for the POSIX testsuite.
H.J.