[csw-maintainers] bad interactions with CSWcommon

[Philip Brown]

On 7/13/10, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Tue Jul 13 12:25:08 -0400 2010:
>
>> and... it's inconsistent.
>> for example, it provides
>
>> (no 'd' entry for the lt directory itself. Erm.. that's because of
>> deduplication with
>>   cswcommon, I suppose? But still, inconsistency==not good)
>
> Right.  The prototype provides a symlink from each LC_TIME to the
> corresponding LC_MESSAGES.  It's only after installation that it gets
> inconsistent.
>
>> 1. cswcommon gets updated, to symlink ALL LC_TIME dirs to LC_MESSAGES
>> 2. cswcommon gets a README file mentioning that the reason for the
>> LC_TIME links,
>>     is to track coreutils local stuffs (and that as more locales get
>> added, more
>>     dirs and LC_TIME symlinks should be added to it)
>>
>> 3. coreutils then gets to skip its LC_TIME symlinks.
>
> ...Can you re-read that and then tell me it makes sense from a
> maintenance point of view?
>
> So now, you're proposing that we _extend_ the current breakage (in the
> event some package actually needs separate LC_TIME/LC_MESSAGES which
> is VALID)?  Not only does this continue to take away from what gettext
> has to offer, but it doubles the maintenance burden for these
> directories...in a non-automated way.
>
> I'm counter-proposing this:
>
> 1. Remove all share/locale/* from cswcommon
> 2. Keep coreutils as it is.
> 3. Fix packages (if any remaining) that break as a result, which is a
>    rather trivial thing to do.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks
> -Ben
> --
> Ben Walton
> Systems Programmer - CHASS
> University of Toronto
> C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302
>
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
>