[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-gnulib] human, hard-locale changes to assume <locale.h>

From: Stepan Kasal
Subject: Re: [bug-gnulib] human, hard-locale changes to assume <locale.h>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:04:00 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i


On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:51:21PM +0100, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
> > assume <locale.h>.
> The same move in GNU gettext, 4 years ago, had no negative impact.

and, of course, this doesn't prove anything.  If I wanted to compile
eg. GNU sed on an ancient host, I wouldn't be surprised if I had to
give --disable-nls to get things work.

Would gnulib drop memmove.c if it were supported on all relatively
recent hosts?

I don't want to be an obstacle to your nice work.  And I can easily
trust your judgment that the HAVE_LOCALE_H should go.

My point is just that coreutils and gettext are the wrong test animals
here.  If make, sed or gawk would assume locale.h, _that_ would be a
really strong reason.

Have a nice day,
        Stepan Kasal

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]