Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 22:41:53 +0900 From: Motoyuki Konno <motoyuki@bsdclub.org> To: CHOI Junho <cjh@kr.FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Alexey Zelkin <phantom@freebsd.org>, Motoyuki Konno <motoyuki@freebsd.org>, stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, re@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: several locale renames were MFCed Message-ID: <200201071341.g07Dfrd08377@sakura.mk.bsdclub.org> References: <20020105183137.A79023@ark.cris.net> <200201060751.g067pJd05268@sakura.mk.bsdclub.org> <20020106145658.A24730@ark.cris.net> <200201061333.g06DXmd05825@sakura.mk.bsdclub.org> <20020106154124.A32469@ark.cris.net> <86pu4nvtg2.fsf@gradius.wdb.co.kr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
CHOI Junho <cjh@kr.FreeBSD.ORG> wrote:
> AZ> Two ways in my opinion:
>
> AZ> 1. link ja_JP.EUC -> ja_JP.eucJP
> AZ> 2. Always create ja_JP.EUC and ja_JP.eucJP and make links
> AZ> between files.
Currently, many ports install files under ja_JP.EUC directory.
We must move those files from ja_JP.EUC to ja_JP.eucJP manually
*before* "ln -s ja_JP.eucJP ja_JP.EUC".
So, I think 'plan 2' is better.
> Well. For other EUC locales(ko_KR.EUC and zh_CN.EUC), similar solution
> should be provided. But, who makes this links? XFree86 ports or
> individual ports?
I think "individual ports" is better. If XFree86 port make the link,
we must update XFree86 port. Such update will affect many many
FreeBSD users.
P.S.
Bump PORTREVISION !
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motoyuki Konno motoyuki@bsdclub.org (Home)
motoyuki@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Project)
http://www.freebsd.org/~motoyuki/ (WWW)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201071341.g07Dfrd08377>