Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 21:18:16 +0200 From: Felix Janda <felix.janda@...teo.de> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: libintl: stubs or working functions On Thu, Mar 06, 2015 at 22:24:15PM GMT, Rich Felker wrote: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 04:36:49PM +0700, Рысь wrote: [snip] > > * Did I understand that right that I do not need GNU gettext anymore and > > I can use musl's interface for that? > > Yes, modulo some GNU software (coreutils for example) that probes for > glibc/gnu-libintl internals at configure time and depends on > poorly-designed and undocumented features (SYSDEP strings). These > programs will not work without either GNU libintl or patching out the > bad parts of configure and using a version of msgfmt that works around > the need for SYSDEP strings. I believe the one from sabotage > gettext-tiny does. I would like to see what it takes to fix the autoconf tests. The problem is the macro AM_GNU_GETTEXT with the check http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gettext.git/tree/gettext-runtime/m4/gettext.m4#n159 (It looks for the internal symbols _nl_msg_cat_cntr and _nl_domain_bindings instead of relying on __GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION().) debian code search suggests that quite a lot of projects use this macro. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-utils/2006-03/msg00011.html gives some reasoning for the unportable tests: * _GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION() was only introduced in gettext 0.10.xx * _GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION() of glibc says that it does not support major revision 1 although it does I would like to ask the gettext developers for an additional test "for GNU gettext in libc", which fails if __GLIBC__ uses _GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION and can only improve the previous test result. Any comments on this or alternative approaches? Thanks, Felix
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.