Re: [PATCH] Gracefully handle incompatible locale data

[Carlos O'Donell]

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.