[blfs-dev] xindy - need to build in C locale

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Fri Jan 23 19:54:35 PST 2015

Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 09:17:38PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>   What I do not understand is why my two-pass builds from texlive
>>> worked on x86_64 but not on i686.  For xindy-2.5.1 it is possible
>>> that something changed (or, at very long odds, maybe something in
>>> perl), but now that I understand the problem I'm off to ensure that
>>> all my scripts export LC_ALL=C.
>>>   The problem is during the build, so a user building as themself in
>>> a UTF-8 locale need tso do this.  I guess that jhalfs builds using
>>> the 'C' locale ?
>> I believe it does.  grep for LC_ALL in the jhalfs directory.
>>>   Do we have a preferred form of words for telling people that they
>>> need to do that ?  e.g. mention it in the note, somehow save LC_ALL
>>> if different, set LC_ALL, build, restore ?  And is POSIX the same as
>>> 'C' for LC_ALL, and if so, do we prefer that ?
>> C and POSIX are synonymous.   In LFS we use LC_ALL=POSIX in Section 4.4, but
>> there are places where
>> If you change LC_ALL in a script, you don't need to unset it, but we don't
>> assume that.  For the book, you can use either
>> LC_ALL=POSIX  (or C)
>> ...
>> or
>> bash
>> LC_ALL=POSIX  (or C)
>> ...
>> exit
>> It works out to about the same.
>> Does this mean we can get ticket #5926 closed?

>   When the text is changed.  I won't be doing that today, and since
> I've passed the ticket back, anybody is welcome to take it.
>   Using bash if it is not required will probably upset Igor 8-P
>   Xindy seems, to me, to be one of the few packages which now has to
> be built in the C or POSIX locale.  I have to admit that I thought
> my root user used to live in those, but obviously he or she does not
> live there now.
>   I'm just creating tickets for some updated perl moduless (did not
> realise how many I now build to support testsuites on other perl
> modules).  Will test _those_ in my upcoming build.
>   Thanks for your efforts to get towards testing xindy, I'm sure you
> can find other shortcomings in my texlive hacks.
>   Oh, and I finally got onto the right path by using debug switches
> on texindy, intstead of xindy - most of the log was spurious
> errors in both the good and the bad runs.

Sounds good.  If you could take back the ticket and do the fixes at your 
convenience (no rush), I'd appreciate it.

   -- Bruce

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list