Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 14:58:38 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin started speaking German today
Message-ID: <20111005185838.GA11426@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20111004122837 DOT GA27229 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4E8B0007 DOT 5020500 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <20111004142920 DOT GA15757 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4E8B4A86 DOT 5000607 AT xs4all DOT nl> <20111004182042 DOT GA22299 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4E8C7FFB DOT 6060707 AT xs4all DOT nl> <20111005162714 DOT GA14661 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4E8C948D DOT 4070707 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <4E8CA0AF DOT 50805 AT cornell DOT edu> <1317840641 DOT 1708 DOT 27 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1317840641.1708.27.camel@YAAKOV04>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 01:50:33PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 14:23 -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>> I think you're mixing two questions that should be kept separate.  The 
>> first is how /etc/profile.d/lang.{sh,csh} should set LANG.  That's a 
>> question that the Cygwin developers and/or base-files maintainer need to 
>> decide.
>
>Agreed.  There are pros and cons both ways, and I'll leave that for
>another message.
>
>> The second is whether libintl should override Cygwin's locale 
>> settings.  Isn't the answer clearly no?  Why can't this be fixed (in 
>> opposition to Bruno, if necessary) before a final decision is made about 
>> /etc/profile.d/lang.{sh,csh}?
>
>Agreed.  Cygwin is a *NIX platform, and libintl needs to respect that by
>not trying to set or override LANG/LC_MESSAGES.  Upstream's disagreement
>with this point is completely irrelevant; it is simply not their place
>to dictate to us how our platform should operate.  While it would seem
>that it means carrying a patch for the foreseeable future (not that
>gettext releases that often), if upstream refuses to cooperate then I
>don't see that we have much of a choice.
>
>You are also correct that this can and should be fixed ASAP, even before
>the first point is decided.  +1 for patching this now.

Ditto on all of the above points.

This is a free software project so, of course, every decision is up for
debate but the ultimate decision on how our project does stuff rests
with us, the maintainers of the stuff that the end-users see.  So, while
Bruno's opinion is valuable, it should not be definitive.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple