From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jun 06 18:57:47 2017 Received: (at 27244) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jun 2017 22:57:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59997 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dINQ3-00012v-6b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 18:57:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45584) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dINQ1-00012j-SR for 27244@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 18:57:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dINPr-0000gj-Qb for 27244@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 18:57:40 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39443) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dINPr-0000gb-OB; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 18:57:35 -0400 Received: from astlambert-651-1-208-19.w92-151.abo.wanadoo.fr ([92.151.64.19]:37538 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dINPr-000101-3c; Tue, 06 Jun 2017 18:57:35 -0400 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) To: Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> Subject: Re: bug#27244: Should not $GUIX_LOCPATH belong to =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=98glibc-locales=E2=80=99?= rather than =?utf-8?B?4oCY?= =?utf-8?B?Z2xpYmPigJk/?= References: <87shjf8abx.fsf@gmail.com> <87inka9nk4.fsf@gnu.org> <87zidl294a.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 19 Prairial an 225 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 00:57:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87zidl294a.fsf@gmail.com> (Dmitry Alexandrov's message of "Tue, 06 Jun 2017 04:33:09 +0300") Message-ID: <87tw3s7mi3.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 27244 Cc: 27244@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----) Dmitry Alexandrov <321942@gmail.com> skribis: >>> As of now [0] a search path =E2=80=98GUIX_LOCPATH=E2=80=99 is exported = when =E2=80=98glibc=E2=80=99 >>> package, which does not comprise any locales, is installed. I guess, >>> it should belong to =E2=80=98glibc-locales=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98glibc-= utf8-locales=E2=80=99 instead. >> >> The idea of search path specifications like =E2=80=98GUIX_LOCPATH=E2=80= =99 is that the >> package that honors them defines them. >> >> For example, Python defines =E2=80=98PYTHONPATH=E2=80=99, Guile defines >> =E2=80=98GUILE_LOAD_PATH=E2=80=99, and so on. > > But locales are honoured by nearly every program. And nearly every > program complains when they are not found: > > $ guix > guile: warning: failed to install locale > warning: failed to install locale: Invalid argument Yeah. >> In this case, =E2=80=98GUIX_LOCPATH=E2=80=99 is honored by glibc, so gli= bc defines it. > > From the user point of view =E2=80=98glibc=E2=80=99 is a package that ins= talls > catchsegv(1), getconf(1), getent(1), iconv(1), ldd(1), locale(1), > localedef(1), makedb(1), mtrace(1), pcprofiledump, sprof(1), > tzselect(1) and xtrace(1). > > At least on top of a foreign distro, when Guix is used as a > language-specific package manager for GNU Guile for instance, that is a > quite unlikely a package to be installed in the profile. Right. >> If instead =E2=80=98glibc-utf8-locales=E2=80=99 defined it, then you=E2= =80=99d immediately get >> the recommendation about setting =E2=80=98GUIX_LOCPATH=E2=80=99, which I= guess is what >> you=E2=80=99d like to see. > > Yes, that is exactly what I expected as a user: when locales are > installed they come into play. > >> However, every locale-providing package would need to define it, >> which is not great. > > But would not thorough following =E2=80=9Csearch paths are exported by the > active side=E2=80=9D convention implies that every single package that sh= ips a > localized program has to define $GUIX_LOCPATH? That would be about > 100=C2=A0% of packages, I guess. Correct. > On the other hand, now there are only two locale-providing packages, > as I can see: =E2=80=98glibc-locales=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98glibc-utf8-loc= ales=E2=80=99. Are there > plans to split them up? Is not that supposed to be done by means of > =E2=80=98outputs=E2=80=99: glibc-locales:en, glibc-locales:fr, etc? There are no concrete plans no. The problem is that any split is really arbitrary. > (By the way, =E2=80=98glibc-utf8-locales=E2=80=99 looks like a misnomer t= o me, on the > first glance on it a user have nothing but to think that it comprises > UTF-8 locales for all supported languages.) It is! The manual clearly warns about it, saying that it=E2=80=99s =E2=80= =9Climited to a few UTF-8 locales=E2=80=9D: . Note that the Guix 0.13.0 binary tarball comes with glibc-utf8-locales and glibc, such that its etc/profile defines =E2=80=98GUIX_LOCPATH=E2=80=99. >> On a related note, see this issue about indirect search path >> specifications: . > > Oops. My bad, I indeed should search for opened bugs more carefully. > (I hope it should be possible to merge two issues within debbugs, is > not it?) Yes we can merge them. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.