On 2021-06-08 02:35:30-0400, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 10:01:12AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> I kind of wonder if trying "C.UTF-8" would be a reasonable fallback so > > >> that people don't even have to set this extra Makefile knob. But I'm not > > >> sure if we have a good way of testing if that locale works (if we can't > > >> find the "locale" binary). > > > > > > I also think we should fallback to "C.UTF-8" instead of not testing those > > > tests. However, I don't know if there're any systems that not have "C.UTF-8" > > > locale. > > > > I do share the feeling, but have a hunch that systems lacking > > "locale -a" may be either superset of, or has at least large overlap > > with, those lacking "C.UTF-8", and the new mechanism introduced here > > will cover both of them, so I think it is OK to stop here, at least > > for now. > > Yeah, I think it is OK to stop here, too. I'd worry that we'd make life > unnecessarily complicated for people testing on platforms that lack > "locale" and C.UTF-8, for little gain. Argh, reading this and my patch again, I figured out a regression with my patch when either LC_ALL and LANG is set but to something not ending with utf-8 will ignore "locale -a" completely. I'll send a reroll later. (With this reroll, we'll ignore the dumb ":", too. > > The v4 patch looks good to me. > > -Peff -- Danh
