Re: utf8 patch for mc, slang 2 version

[Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczek rudy mif pg gda pl>]

On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Egmont Koblinger wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 07:14:41PM +0200, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
>
> > BTW: anyone is working on UFT-8 support for ncurses(w) backend ?
>
> I don't think so, and I don't think it is worth it. Maintaining two backends
> IMHO just causes headaches while it doesn't make mc better. I still can't
> see why developers do not decide which one to use and drop the other one.

If someone want ask which backend is more importand and will be better 
keep as major IMO answer tn this kind question is very simple:

# rpm -q --whatrequires libslang.so.2 | grep -v slang | wc -l
4
# rpm -q --whatrequires libncurses.so.5 libncursesw.so.5 | grep -v ncurses |wc -l
55

Above slang list contain only packages which do not have now ncurses 
backend and are not importand as mc :)
Also current state have other sick points on Linux. In case using mc with 
gpm it causes runtime linking with more than one term toolkit library 
(slang or internal slang and ncurses used by libgpm).

[..]
> > [mc]$ for i in po/*.po; do msgconv -t UTF-8 $i -o $i; done
>
> Are you sure it is safe to use the same output file? I'd rather use a tmp
> file.

I'm sure. msgconv cumulates output in memory and aftewr finish conversion 
writes output to file name passed in -o parameter in single step.

kloczek
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
*Ludzie nie mają problemów, tylko sobie sami je stwarzają*
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomasz Kłoczko, sys adm @zie.pg.gda.pl|*e-mail: kloczek rudy mif pg gda pl*