Coreutils-i18n patch

DJ Lucas dj at
Mon Oct 6 16:41:45 PDT 2008

DJ Lucas wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Noted in DJ's book (I'll continue to refer to it as that
>> even though his book is what will be SVN, he's the one
>> that got all this stuff going) that we've dropped the
>> i18n patch for Coreutils. IIRC, upstream won't touch it,
>> and I think I remember there may have been a discussion
>> about it here, but I want to revisit it to ensure that
>> we're all good dropping it and/or keeping it.
>> Alexander may have some good info here, as others may
>> also, but I want to ensure the community is agreed as to
>> the direction we take.
>> I'm not an i18n person, so I really cannot contribute
>> anything worthwhile other than bringing it up here.
>> I'm going to update Coreutils to 6.12 without the patch
>> and we can always add it if we determine it should be
>> there. I simply don't know if it should or should not be.
> That patch has been buggy in the past.  The current upstream version of 
> it does not apply to raw Coreutils-6.12, and it has been rejected by 
> upstream in the past.  While I can certainly munge that patch into 
> applying, I do not have any reliable way to test the changes other than 
> witnessing no change.
Must have been more than 2 months and 2 weeks since I tested it.  The 
current patch applies (with fuzz and offset).  It does not build in the 
host system (BLFS-6.3) however.  Again, I'll drop it in when this one is 
done and run through the tests that Alexander posted.  FYI, the first 
test confirmed that the first sed in GLibC was correctly removed.

-- DJ Lucas

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list