Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 23:50:12 +0200 From: Joel Dahl <joel@vnode.se> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UTF-8 by default? Message-ID: <20160720215012.GA77588@ymer.vnode.se> In-Reply-To: <20160720190841.iuplrbhmdq7sr6br@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: <CANd9X8f5wHvdwN_XZ2y0qsiydYyb=NKLXF0k65S0_TiuWHeGKA@mail.gmail.com> <B68D48ED-66CA-4E5B-8ED2-555B397AC73E@FreeBSD.org> <20160720140741.yi7vfgmmqtg6eprx@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160720183814.GA77261@ymer.vnode.se> <20160720190841.iuplrbhmdq7sr6br@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:08:41PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 08:38:14PM +0200, Joel Dahl wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 04:07:41PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:47:45AM -0230, Jonathan Anderson wrote: > > > > On 20 Jul 2016, at 9:13, Tim Čas wrote: > > > > > > > > > So, without further ado: > > > > > 1) What are the reasons that UTF-8 isn't the default yet? > > > > > 2) Would it be possible to make this the default in 11.0? What about > > > > > 12.0? > > > > > 3) Assuming an effort is started towards making UTF-8 the default, > > > > > what changes would be required? > > > > > > > > At least according to one of my students (who makes more extensive use of > > > > i18n than I do), enabling UTF-8 by default is pretty straightforward: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/musec/freebsd/wiki/Common-setup#utf-8-support > > > > > > the LC_COLLATE=C is not needed anymore with freebsd 11+ > > > > > > > > If there's anything missing there, I'd love to hear about it. > > > > > > > - unicode support in our old groff is pretty bad, I plan to replace it with > > > heirloom-doctools which does handle unicode propertly (as far I have tested > > > at least) > > > > I haven't really been paying attention lately so things might have changed, > > but why can't we just remove groff now? We have mdocml, and for people that > > really need the groff functionality can just install it or heirloom-doctools > > from ports. The initial plan was to remove groff after we imported mdocml, but > > it was never removed and I lost interest, so again, things might have changed > > since then. > > We have roff documentation in based, plus a lot of people argues that not havin > a roff toolchain in base is an issue for them. What is the issue? I tried to find some clues in the mailing list archive, but my google skills are obviously weak. When we discussed this (mainly uqs@ and me) 4 years ago the goal was to move the old roff'ed papers to the doc/ repo. I didn't see any objections when it was suggested on the doc/www mailing lists back in 2013. There is even an old pr about it, 178730. -- Joel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160720215012.GA77588>