From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Gracefully handle incompatible locale data
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:31:49 -0400
Message-ID: <561D07C5.6000604@redhat.com>
References: <876132lbic.fsf@gnu.org> <20150922191804.GA13637@domone>
 <877fnijgin.fsf@gnu.org> <20150922215022.GA27201@domone>
 <8737y4hkrz.fsf@gnu.org> <20150924082755.GA4767@domone>
 <87h9mjeqyy.fsf@gnu.org> <5605BA8D.40907@redhat.com> <87h9mh5vgn.fsf@gnu.org>
 <5609A8E9.7050201@redhat.com> <561C5525.40501@archlinux.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <libc-alpha-return-63982-glibc-alpha=m.gmane.org@sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-unsubscribe-glibc-alpha=m.gmane.org@sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
In-Reply-To: <561C5525.40501@archlinux.org>
To: Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=c3=a8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?T25kxZllaiBCw61sa2E=?= <neleai@seznam.cz>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, guix-devel@gnu.org, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
List-Id: guix-devel.gnu.org

On 10/12/2015 08:49 PM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 29/09/15 06:54, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> On 09/26/2015 06:24 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>> Furthermore, the function in question returns EINVAL in other similar
>>> cases–e.g., when libc 2.22 loads LC_COLLATE data from libc 2.21.
>>
>> If you change this particular case to EINVAL, what does the user see
>> as a result of this change? Do they get a non-zero exit code from
>> `localedef --list-archive` along with an error written out to stderr?
>>
>> This is the kind of change I'm expecting. If we are removing an assertion,
>> we should be replacing it with something meaningful and verifying that
>> meaningful change.
>>
>> You need not change any of the other cases you've found that return EINVAL,
>> we can update those incrementally, but for this one change you're making
>> we should fix it as best we can.
>>
> 
> If I am reading this correctly, the change to from an abort to EINVAL
> would be fine if it is accompanied by a change to localedef
> --list-archive.  Is that correct?
> 
> A solution to this would be great given we now run into this assert with
> locale archives built with different glibc builds along the 2.22 release
> branch.

Yes.

I'll make some general comments in the thread you started about the patch,
rather than here.

Cheers,
Carlos.