Coreutils-i18n patch

DJ Lucas dj at
Mon Oct 6 23:04:16 PDT 2008

DJ Lucas wrote:
> 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.  
The testsuite fails to run to completion, first because nobody doesn't 
have write permissions to config.log, then misc/cut test fails.  Needs 
investigation.  Added config.log to chown command, and added -k to non 
root checks.  For right now, it is just known to fail.  I'll see if I 
can dig up some info on it.

-- 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