From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QKIuE-000616-D3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 23:33:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 031F31C016; Wed, 11 May 2011 23:31:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org (mail.ukfsn.org [77.75.108.10]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40301C016 for ; Wed, 11 May 2011 23:31:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B78B2DECE4 for ; Thu, 12 May 2011 00:31:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org ([192.168.54.25]) by localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YAiQ+37saNNS for ; Thu, 12 May 2011 00:31:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from wstn.localnet (unknown [78.32.181.186]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BF75DECDC for ; Thu, 12 May 2011 00:31:46 +0100 (BST) From: Peter Humphrey Organization: at home To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone? Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 00:31:45 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.37-gentoo-r4; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; ) References: <4DC9B435.9010308@gmail.com> <4DCAFC4F.1080404@kutulu.org> In-Reply-To: <4DCAFC4F.1080404@kutulu.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201105120031.45768.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: d4de7a98d6bb5f26203e30c171a19794 On Wednesday 11 May 2011 22:14:55 Mike Edenfield wrote: > The only problem with LC_ALL is that it overrides all of the other LC_* > variables. - which is precisely what most ordinary desktop users want. In such a case it's a useful shorthand. Personally, I have no intention of ever allowing US "English" to pollute any of my boxes (no offence meant to anyone here), so LC_ALL="en_GB.UTF-8" suits me (so far - until I trip over something!). > Setting just LANG= and setting just LC_ALL= have the same ultimate result: > every localization category uses the same locale. I knew a manager some years ago* who tried hard to persuade his bosses that he could be in two places at once - he even had two fish-huts! He was usually to be found in the same time-zone though, for all that. > The difference is that setting LC_ALL means you can't turn around and redefine, > say, just LC_TIME to use some other locale's format. This isn't going to be the majority case though, is it? I'm not talking about globe-trotting laptops here; just your ordinary desktop box. You can tell from my tone, I hope, that I'm only half-serious, but still I can't see why the simple approach should be frowned on so severely. What practical benefit do I lose by setting LC_ALL once and for all? This machine has been in the same place all its life, and I'm confident that won't change. The same applies to my other machines. I say it's time for document writers to recognise two cases explicitly: static machines and mobile ones. * He worked 24 hours/day for a mainframe system integrator near Minneapolis. That didn't stop it going down the pan when its marketing department failed to see the direction of the prevailing wind in its most important contract ever. -- Rgds Peter