Debian Bug report logs - #119528
locales support for Romanian

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: locales support for Romanian

Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:36:31 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Package: locales
Version: 2.2.4-5


The file ro_RO in /usr/share/i18n/locales/ro_RO needs major improuvment.

I will attach a new file to this e-mail.



Ionel
-- 
                     Ionel  Mugurel   Ciobîcă                    
 Schuit   Institute  of   Catalysis   Phone: 00 31 (0)40 2473781 
 Eindhoven University of Technology   Fax:   00 31 (0)40 2455054 
 Laboratory  of  Catalysis,   _SKA_   e-mail: I.M.Ciobica@TUe.nl 
 Theory Group, STW 4.27, POBox 513 5600MB Eindhoven, Netherlands 
                                        _____                    
   .''`.                (o-     This is Linux Country.      -o)  
  : :'  :               //\     On a quiet night, you       /\\  
  `. `'`                V_/_    can hear Windows reboot.   _\_V  
    `-  www.Debian.org                                           
                                                                 
"Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted."

[ro_RO (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>

To: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>, 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: locales support for Romanian

Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:11:43 +0900

> The file ro_RO in /usr/share/i18n/locales/ro_RO needs major improuvment.
> 
> I will attach a new file to this e-mail.
> 
> %
> % Romanian Language Locale for Romania
> % Language: ro
> % Territory: RO
> % Ionel Mugurel Ciob=EEc=E3, =A9 2001
> % Charset: ISO-8859-16
> % Distribution and use is free, also
> % for commercial purposes.

ISO-8859-16 is really used so widely in your country?
And your version changed so much...  Is it really OK?
Did you contact the original author?

Regards,
-- gotom

Message #15 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

To: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>

Cc: 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: locales support for Romanian

Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 12:54:01 +0100

On 26-02-2003, at 20h 11'43", GOTO Masanori wrote to mugurel about "Re: locales support for Romanian"
> > The file ro_RO in /usr/share/i18n/locales/ro_RO needs major improvement.
> > 
> > I will attach a new file to this e-mail.
> > 
> > %
> > % Romanian Language Locale for Romania
> > % Language: ro
> > % Territory: RO
> > % Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă, Š 2001
> > % Charset: ISO-8859-16
> > % Distribution and use is free, also
> > % for commercial purposes.
> 
> ISO-8859-16 is really used so widely in your country?

No. It is a new encoding and it needs time to replace the
other ones. The most used are ASCII and ISO-8859-1. None of
them really supports Romanian. ISO-8859-16 (besides UTF-8)
is the only one which actually supports most (not all) of
Romanian specific characters. Still missing are the closing
quotations (like double quotations in German), the dialog
line (a sort of em-dash), the quotation dash (Unicode hex 2015)
cratima (a sort of dash, but to unite words, not to separate 
them, the actual use of it has to avoid separations at the end
of the line).

> And your version changed so much...  Is it really OK?

Well, it has been some time since I submitted. It works well with potato
and sid, but not with sarge. No clue, why. If you give me a link to the
references (what to contain) I could make a newer one.

> Did you contact the original author?

I did contacted some people. Who is the original author?
Are you taking over the locale stuff from Debian?


Best regards,
        Ionel

Message #18 received at 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>

To: 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>

Subject: Re: locales support for Romanian

Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:50:54 +0200

I noticed the following on <URL:http://bugs.debian.org/119528>:

> I did contacted some people. Who is the original author?

The original author seem to be Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>.

I believe you will need to supply official sources for your version to
get the changes accepted by the glibc maintainers.

I copy this to the original author of the ro_RO locale to let him know
about your change request.

Message #21 received at 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>

To: 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>

Subject: Re: locales support for Romanian

Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:57:47 +0200

[Petter Reinholdtsen]
> The original author seem to be Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>.

It should be 'Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.dk'.  I forwarded the email to the
correct address.

Message #24 received at 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

To: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>

Cc: libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.dk>

Subject: Re: Proposed changes to ro_RO locale (Debian bug #119528)

Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 17:20:45 +0200

On 15-06-2003, at 14h 57'46", Petter Reinholdtsen wrote to mugurel about "Proposed changes to ro_RO locale (Debian bug #119528)"
> 
> Hello again.  I've noticed your proposed changes to the ro_RO locale
> in glibc, available from <URL:http://bugs.debian.org/119528>.  The
> format of the locale files are documented in "ISO/IEC TR14652:2002",
> available from <URL:http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg20/>.  Your
> suggested locale contains several changes compared to the current
> version.  Do you have references to confirm that your suggested
> changes are correct?

Which kind of references do you need? I am Romanian, it is that good
enough? I am a member of the Romanian Translators for Free Software
(http://rtfs.sourceforge.net/,
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtfs-project) were we try
to make a common standard for the Romanian versions of the free (and
not only free) software.

You sent me an other e-mail before, were you told me to contact the
original author of this Romanian locale files:

> The original author seem to be Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>.

I did not contacted him, since the e-mail address seams wrong.

> I include a diff to the current CVS version of locales/ro_RO.  Here
> are some comments and questions regarding your changes.
> 
>  - Why do you want to use space U0020 as the thousand separator?
>    Isn't non-break space U00A0 better, to avoid line break in the
>    middle of a number?

I guess that in the previous version it was a dot. I just wanted to say
it should be a space. But you are right, U00A0 is better than U0020. In
fact even better would be a shorter space...
> 
>  - Why did you change '2000' to '2001' in the category entries in the
>    LC_IDENTIFICATION section?

Well, I proposed those changes in 2001... What was the significance of
2000 over there?
> 
>  - Can you provide examples on the correct sorting order, number
>    format (normal and monetary)?  I would like to add regression test
>    cases.

Yes, I can. The Romanian alphabet is: <A>, <A(>, <A>>, <B>, <C>, <D>,
<E>, <F>, <G>, <H>, <I>, <I>>, <J>, <K>, <L>, <M>, <N>, <O>, <P>, <R>,
<S>, <S,>, <T>, <T,>, <U>, <V>, <X>, <Z>. The correct sorting order is
the same like in the alphabet. The numbers and other characters are at
the end, after <Z>. Since the increase of the computer usage in Romania,
more and more people make usage of the non-Romanian letters: <Q>, <W>,
and <Y>. I guess those could be ordered like in the English alphabet:
<Q> between <P> and <R>, <W> between <V> and <X> and <Y> between <X> and
<Z>. But is not so important since those letters (<Q>, <W>, and <Y>) are
not present in any Romanian word.

The number format is like that:
a million: "1 000 000"
pi: "3,14 159 26..."
monetary: "25 367,50 lei", "1,00 leu", "-5 000 lei"
(Some times the two digits after the comma are smaller and a bit higher.)

> 
> I copy this to the glibc development list.

OK. I will add some extra explanations bellow.

> 
> Index: ro_RO
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/glibc/libc/localedata/locales/ro_RO,v
> retrieving revision 1.13
> diff -u -3 -p -u -r1.13 ro_RO
> --- ro_RO	3 Aug 2001 08:40:30 -0000	1.13
> +++ ro_RO	15 Jun 2003 12:44:23 -0000
> @@ -2,29 +2,19 @@ comment_char %
>  escape_char  /
>  %
>  % Romanian Language Locale for Romania
> -% Source: RAP
> -% Address: Sankt Jo//rgens Alle 8
> -%    DK-1615 Ko//benhavn V, Danmark
> -% Contact: Keld Simonsen
> -% Email: Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.dk
> -% Tel: +45 - 31226543
> -% Fax: +45 - 33256543
>  % Language: ro
>  % Territory: RO
> -% Revision: 4.3
> -% Date: 1996-10-15
> -% Application: general
> -% Users: general
> -% Charset: ISO-8859-2
> +% Ionel Mugurel Ciobîcă, Š 2001
> +% Charset: ISO-8859-16

ISO-8859-2 has no support for Romanian language. Only for the letter a
with breve <A(>, but the alternative quotations are missing, compared
with ISO-8859-1, so ISO-8859-1 would be better than ISO-8859-2.

ISO-8859-16 has support for almost all Romanian characters.

See the table:
               <A>>   <I>>   <A(>   <S,>   <T,>  ,, '' << >>  euro
------------------------------------------------------------------
ASCII          no     no     no     no     no     no    no    no 
ISO-8859-1     yes    yes    no     no     no     no    yes   no 
ISO-8859-2     yes    yes    yes    no     no     no    no    no 
ISO-8859-15    yes    yes    no     no     no     no    no    yes
ISO-8859-16    yes    yes    yes    yes    yes    *     yes   yes
UTF-8          yes    yes    yes    yes    yes    yes   yes   yes
___
* = only the opening of the quotations is supported in ISO-8859-16.


>  % Distribution and use is free, also
>  % for commercial purposes.
>  
>  LC_IDENTIFICATION
>  title      "Romanian locale for Romania"
>  source     "RAP"
> -address    "Sankt Jorgens Alle 8, DK-1615 Kobenhavn V, Danmark"
> +address    "TUE, SKA, POBOX 513, 5600MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands"
>  contact    ""
> -email      "bug-glibc@gnu.org"
> +email      "I.M.Ciobica@TUe.nl"
>  tel        ""
>  fax        ""
>  language   "Romanian"
> @@ -32,17 +22,17 @@ territory  "Romania"
>  revision   "1.0"
>  date       "2000-06-29"
>  %
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_IDENTIFICATION
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_CTYPE
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_COLLATE
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_TIME
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_NUMERIC
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_MONETARY
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_MESSAGES
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_PAPER
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_NAME
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_ADDRESS
> -category  "ro_RO:2000";LC_TELEPHONE
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_IDENTIFICATION
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_CTYPE
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_COLLATE
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_TIME
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_NUMERIC
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_MONETARY
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_MESSAGES
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_PAPER
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_NAME
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_ADDRESS
> +category  "ro_RO:2001";LC_TELEPHONE
>  
>  END LC_IDENTIFICATION
>  
> @@ -109,23 +99,19 @@ copy "i18n"
>  translit_start
>  include "translit_combining";""
>  
> -% if t/scomma is not available, try first t/scedilla
> -<U0218> "<U015E>";"<U0053>"
> -<U0219> "<U015F>";"<U0073>"
> -<U021A> "<U0162>";"<U0054>"
> -<U021B> "<U0163>";"<U0074>"
> -
> -% if t/scedilla is not available, try first t/scomma
> -<U015E> "<U0218>";"<U0053>"
> -<U015F> "<U0219>";"<U0073>"
> -<U0162> "<U021A>";"<U0054>"
> -<U0163> "<U021B>";"<U0074>"
> +% if t/scomma is not available, try t/s
> +% if t/scedilla is not available, don't try anything
> +% since scedilla belong to Turkish and tcedilla to none
> +<U0218> "<U0053>"
> +<U0219> "<U0073>"
> +<U021A> "<U0054>"
> +<U021B> "<U0074>"

I have no idea who started all this craziness with t_cedilla.
This letter belong to no one. There is no nation in the world who
actually use it. The s_cedilla is used in Turkey, but not very
consistent, as some Turkish prefer the s_comma.

In Romanian only the t/s with comma is correct.
So, it the t/s_cedilla is not available, we should be happy.
>  
>  translit_end
>  END LC_CTYPE
>  
>  LC_MESSAGES
> -yesexpr "<U005E><U005B><U0044><U0064><U0059><U0079><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> +yesexpr "<U005E><U005B><U0044><U0064><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
>  noexpr  "<U005E><U005B><U006E><U004E><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
>  END LC_MESSAGES

I don't see why Y should be listed as yes, since:
1. the Romanian word for yes is "DA"
2. there is no Y letter in Romanian alphabet
>  
> @@ -133,15 +119,15 @@ LC_MONETARY
>  int_curr_symbol           "<U0052><U004F><U004C><U0020>"
>  currency_symbol           "<U004C><U0065><U0069>"
>  mon_decimal_point         "<U002C>"
> -mon_thousands_sep         "<U002E>"
> +mon_thousands_sep         "<U0020>"
>  mon_grouping              3;3
>  positive_sign             ""
>  negative_sign             "<U002D>"
>  int_frac_digits           2
>  frac_digits               2
> -p_cs_precedes             1
> +p_cs_precedes             0
>  p_sep_by_space            1
> -n_cs_precedes             1
> +n_cs_precedes             0
>  n_sep_by_space            1
>  p_sign_posn               1
>  n_sign_posn               1
> @@ -149,46 +135,46 @@ END LC_MONETARY
>  
>  LC_NUMERIC
>  decimal_point             "<U002C>"
> -thousands_sep             ""
> +thousands_sep             "<U0020>"
>  grouping                  0;0
>  END LC_NUMERIC
>  
>  LC_TIME
> -abday   "<U0044><U0075>";"<U004C><U0075>";"<U004D><U0061>";"<U004D><U0069>";/
> -        "<U004A><U006F>";"<U0056><U0069>";"<U0053><U00EE>"
> -day     "<U0044><U0075><U006D><U0069><U006E><U0069><U0063><U0102>";/
> -        "<U004C><U0075><U006E><U0069>";/
> -        "<U004D><U0061><U0072><U0163><U0069>";/
> -        "<U004D><U0069><U0065><U0072><U0063><U0075><U0072><U0069>";/
> -        "<U004A><U006F><U0069>";/
> -        "<U0056><U0069><U006E><U0065><U0072><U0069>";/
> -        "<U0053><U00EE><U006D><U0062><U0102><U0074><U0102>"
> +abday   "<U0020><U0044>";"<U0020><U004C>";"<U004D><U0061>";"<U004D><U0069>";/
> +        "<U0020><U004A>";"<U0020><U0056>";"<U0020><U0053>"

Nobody uses Lu, Ma, Mi, Jo, Vi, Sî, Du as abbreviated days of the week.
For a calendar purposes I have seen this:

     Iunie 2003
 L  M  M  J  V  S  D
                   1
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8
 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30

or

     Iunie 2003
 L Ma Mi  J  V  S  D
                   1
 2  3  4  5  6  7  8
 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30

There is no other usage for abbreviated days of the week.

> +day     "<U0064><U0075><U006D><U0069><U006E><U0069><U0063><U0103>";/
> +        "<U006C><U0075><U006E><U0069>";/
> +        "<U006D><U0061><U0072><U021B><U0069>";/
> +        "<U006D><U0069><U0065><U0072><U0063><U0075><U0072><U0069>";/
> +        "<U006A><U006F><U0069>";/
> +        "<U0076><U0069><U006E><U0065><U0072><U0069>";/
> +        "<U0073><U00EE><U006D><U0062><U0103><U0074><U0103>"

We don't capitalize the days of the week.

>  abmon   "<U0069><U0061><U006E>";"<U0066><U0065><U0062>";/
>          "<U006D><U0061><U0072>";"<U0061><U0070><U0072>";/
>          "<U006D><U0061><U0069>";"<U0069><U0075><U006E>";/
>          "<U0069><U0075><U006C>";"<U0061><U0075><U0067>";/
>          "<U0073><U0065><U0070>";"<U006F><U0063><U0074>";/
> -        "<U006E><U006F><U0076>";"<U0064><U0065><U0063>"
> -mon     "<U0049><U0061><U006E><U0075><U0061><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U0046><U0065><U0062><U0072><U0075><U0061><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U004D><U0061><U0072><U0074><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U0041><U0070><U0072><U0069><U006C><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U004D><U0061><U0069>";/
> -        "<U0049><U0075><U006E><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U0049><U0075><U006C><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U0041><U0075><U0067><U0075><U0073><U0074>";/
> -        "<U0053><U0065><U0070><U0074><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U004F><U0063><U0074><U006F><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U004E><U006F><U0069><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> -        "<U0044><U0065><U0063><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>"
> -d_t_fmt "<U0025><U0061><U0020><U0025><U0064><U0020><U0025><U0062><U0020><U0025><U0059><U0020><U0025><U0054><U0020><U0025><U005A>"
> +        "<U006E><U006F><U0069>";"<U0064><U0065><U0063>"

There is no letter 'v' in the Romanian word of November (noiembrie), so
why the abbreviation should be 'nov'?

> +mon     "<U0069><U0061><U006E><U0075><U0061><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U0066><U0065><U0062><U0072><U0075><U0061><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U006D><U0061><U0072><U0074><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U0061><U0070><U0072><U0069><U006C><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U006D><U0061><U0069>";/
> +        "<U0069><U0075><U006E><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U0069><U0075><U006C><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U0061><U0075><U0067><U0075><U0073><U0074>";/
> +        "<U0073><U0065><U0070><U0074><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U006F><U0063><U0074><U006F><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U006E><U006F><U0069><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>";/
> +        "<U0064><U0065><U0063><U0065><U006D><U0062><U0072><U0069><U0065>"

We don't capitalize the month names.

> +d_t_fmt "<U0025><U0041><U0020><U0025><U0064><U0020><U0025><U0042><U0020><U0025><U0059><U0020><U0025><U0054>"
>  d_fmt   "<U0025><U0059><U002D><U0025><U006D><U002D><U0025><U0064>"
>  t_fmt   "<U0025><U0054>"
>  am_pm   "";""
>  t_fmt_ampm ""
> -date_fmt       "<U0025><U0061><U0020><U0025><U0062><U0020><U0025><U0065>/
> -<U0020><U0025><U0048><U003A><U0025><U004D><U003A><U0025><U0053><U0020>/
> -<U0025><U005A><U0020><U0025><U0059>"
> +date_fmt       "<U0025><U0041><U002C><U0020><U0025><U0065><U0020><U0025><U0042><U0020>/
> +<U0025><U0059><U002C><U0020><U0025><U0048><U0068><U0020><U0025><U004D><U0027><U0025><U0053><U0027><U0027>"
> +% <U0025><U0059><U002C><U0020><U0025><U0048><U003A><U0025><U004D><U003A><U0025><U0053>"
>  END LC_TIME
>  
>  LC_PAPER
> @@ -210,14 +196,23 @@ measurement    1
>  END LC_MEASUREMENT
>  
>  LC_NAME
> -name_fmt    "<U0025><U0064><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0067><U0025><U0074>/
> -<U0025><U006D><U0025><U0074><U0025><U0066>"
> +name_fmt    "<U0025><U0066><U0025><U0067><U0025>"
> +name_miss   "<U0064><U006F><U006D><U006E><U0069><U0219><U006F><U0061><U0072><U0103>"
> +name_mr     "<U0064><U006F><U006D><U006E><U0075><U006C><U0065>"
> +name_mrs    "<U0064><U006F><U0061><U006D><U006E><U0103>"
> +name_ms     "<U0064><U006F><U0061><U006D><U006E><U0103>"
>  END LC_NAME
>  
>  LC_ADDRESS
> -postal_fmt    "<U0025><U0066><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0061><U0025><U004E>/
> -<U0025><U0064><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0062><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0073>/
> -<U0020><U0025><U0068><U0020><U0025><U0065><U0020><U0025><U0072><U0025>/
> -<U004E><U0025><U0025><U007A><U0020><U0025><U0054><U0025>/
> -<U004E><U0025><U0063><U0025><U004E>"
> +postal_fmt    "<U0025><U0066><U0025><U004E>/
> +<U0025><U0064><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0073><U0025>/
> +<U0068><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0062><U002C><U0025>/
> +<U0065><U002C><U0020><U0025><U0072><U0025><U004E>/
> +<U0025><U0054><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0053><U0025>/
> +<U004E><U0025><U007A><U0025><U004E><U0025><U0043>/
> +<U0025><U004E>"
> +country_name  "<U0052><U006F><U006D><U00E2><U006E><U0069><U0061>"
> +country_post  "<U0052><U006F>"
> +lang_name     "<U0052><U006F><U006D><U00E2><U006E><U0065><U0219><U0074><U0065>"
> +lang_ab       "<U0072><U006F>"
>  END LC_ADDRESS
> 


I can look at the new regulations to see if there is anything else I
could provide. This modification I made two years ago.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Best regards,

Ionel Ciobica

--
 Dr.  Ionel  Mugurel   Ciobîcă                           
 Eindhoven University of Technology  e-mail: I.M.Ciobica@TUe.nl 
 SKA, STW 4.46, P.O.Box 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, the Netherlands 
                                                                
 This virus requires Micro$oft Windows to run properly:     
 We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile.    
 Prepare to be assimilated.

Message #27 received at 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>

To: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

Cc: libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Proposed changes to ro_RO locale (Debian bug #119528)

Date: 15 Jun 2003 20:10:47 +0200

[Ionel Mugurel]
> Which kind of references do you need? I am Romanian, it is that good
> enough?

First of all, it isn't me you need to convince, it is one of the
people with write access to the glibc CVS.  I haven't quite understood
where the limits for accepted references are, but knowing the language
is in general not accepted.

Some official standard body or some official body demonstrating how
the romaniam locale output should look might work.  I'm still trying
to understand what will be accepted by the glibc maintainers, but I do
know that the chances improve a lot if the original author agree to
the proposed changes.

> I am a member of the Romanian Translators for Free Software
> (http://rtfs.sourceforge.net/,
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtfs-project) were we
> try to make a common standard for the Romanian versions of the free
> (and not only free) software.

Sounds good, but I am not sure if that is enough to convince the glibc
maintainers.

> I did not contacted him, since the e-mail address seams wrong.

Yes, I forgot a 'k' at the end of '.dk'.  Sorry about that.  I tried
to tell you about it, but must have failed.  Keld reads the libc-alpha
mailing list, so I dropped him from the CC list.

> I guess that in the previous version it was a dot. I just wanted to
> say it should be a space. But you are right, U00A0 is better than
> U0020. In fact even better would be a shorter space...

OK.  Good.

> Well, I proposed those changes in 2001... What was the significance
> of 2000 over there?

I believe it is a reference to the version of a standard.  I've since
been told that a proper value would be 'posix:1993' 'i18n:1999'.  Am
an not sure about all available values.  But I am sure it isn't the
year of the change itself.

> Yes, I can. The Romanian alphabet is: <A>, <A(>, <A>>, <B>, <C>, <D>,
> <E>, <F>, <G>, <H>, <I>, <I>>, <J>, <K>, <L>, <M>, <N>, <O>, <P>, <R>,
> <S>, <S,>, <T>, <T,>, <U>, <V>, <X>, <Z>. The correct sorting order is
> the same like in the alphabet.

Can you send me this as an UTF-8/ISO-8859-16 formatted file with one
entry/word/character on each line?  The lines must be sorted.

> The number format is like that:
> a million: "1 000 000"
> pi: "3,14 159 26..."
> monetary: "25 367,50 lei", "1,00 leu", "-5 000 lei"
> (Some times the two digits after the comma are smaller and a bit higher.)

I've created some test cases.  The current locale uses capital L in
'lei'.  Is this correct or wrong?  How is the monetary values supposed
to look if you use the international currency symbol?

I ended up with this content of tst-fmon.data.  Is it correct:

  #
  # Check the Romaniam locale (ro_RO)
  #
  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%n	123.45		123,45 Lei
  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%n	-123.45		-123,45 Lei
  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%n	3456.781	3 456,78 Lei
  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%n	-3456.781	-3 456,78 Lei

  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%i	1.23		1,23 ROL
  ro_RO.ISO-8859-16	%i	-1.23		-1,23 ROL

The test should use non-break space, but doesn't at the moment.

> I can look at the new regulations to see if there is anything else I
> could provide. This modification I made two years ago.

What do you mean by "new regulations"?

Message #30 received at 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Keld Jørn Simonsen <keld@dkuug.dk>

To: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

Cc: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>, libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.dk>

Subject: Re: Proposed changes to ro_RO locale (Debian bug #119528)

Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 21:36:16 +0200

On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 05:20:45PM +0200, Ionel Mugurel Ciobica wrote:
> On 15-06-2003, at 14h 57'46", Petter Reinholdtsen wrote to mugurel about "Proposed changes to ro_RO locale (Debian bug #119528)"
> > 
> You sent me an other e-mail before, were you told me to contact the
> original author of this Romanian locale files:
> 
> > The original author seem to be Keld Simonsen <Keld.Simonsen@dkuug.d>.

> I did not contacted him, since the e-mail address seams wrong.
> 
I am here, keld.simonsen@dkuug.dk - there was missing a "k" at the end.

> > I include a diff to the current CVS version of locales/ro_RO.  Here
> > are some comments and questions regarding your changes.
> > 
> >  - Why do you want to use space U0020 as the thousand separator?
> >    Isn't non-break space U00A0 better, to avoid line break in the
> >    middle of a number?
> 
> I guess that in the previous version it was a dot. I just wanted to say
> it should be a space. But you are right, U00A0 is better than U0020. In
> fact even better would be a shorter space...

It is possible to leave out the thousands separator by defining it to be
the empty string "".

> >  - Why did you change '2000' to '2001' in the category entries in the
> >    LC_IDENTIFICATION section?
> 
> Well, I proposed those changes in 2001... What was the significance of
> 2000 over there?

It probably should be "i18n:1997"
Revision date for the whole specification is recorded with the
"Revision" keyword.

> >  LC_MESSAGES
> > -yesexpr "<U005E><U005B><U0044><U0064><U0059><U0079><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> > +yesexpr "<U005E><U005B><U0044><U0064><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> >  noexpr  "<U005E><U005B><U006E><U004E><U005D><U002E><U002A>"
> >  END LC_MESSAGES
> 
> I don't see why Y should be listed as yes, since:
> 1. the Romanian word for yes is "DA"
> 2. there is no Y letter in Romanian alphabet

The idea is to allow people to use the english "yes" also.
The "y" may sit in your fingers and this may eliminate some errors when
shifting to your own locale.

best regards
keld

Message #35 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@debian.org>

To: 119528@bugs.debian.org, 119528-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: locales: status of the ro_RO locale?

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 00:26:10 +0200

Package: locales
Version: 2.3.2-2
Followup-For: Bug #119528

Gentlemen,

I am currently reviewing Debian bugs about our locales package.
What is the status of your discussion about the ro_RO locale?
Maybe it should move directly to libc-alpha, don't you think?

Denis

Message #43 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jean-Michel POURE <jm@poure.com>

To: 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 11:29:35 +0200

Dear all,

After upgrading my SID system to the latest version, my locales are completely 
broken. dpkg --reconfigure locales does not work and stops on ru_RU.

I am stuck and cannot use PostgreSQL any longer. This is quite a disaster for 
me. In the future, can you test and discuss your changes first on a mailing 
list and "test". At least, testing means installing on a SID station when 
published on SID. Otherwize, stay away from Debian.

Please include the old Romanian locales immediately and publish them.

Jean-Michel Poure

Message #48 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: barbier@linuxfr.org (Denis Barbier)

To: jm@poure.com, 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#119528: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:54:11 +0200

On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 11:29:35AM +0200, Jean-Michel POURE wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> After upgrading my SID system to the latest version, my locales are completely 
> broken. dpkg --reconfigure locales does not work and stops on ru_RU.

You certainly meant ro_RO.

> I am stuck and cannot use PostgreSQL any longer. This is quite a disaster for 
> me. In the future, can you test and discuss your changes first on a mailing 
> list and "test". At least, testing means installing on a SID station when 
> published on SID. Otherwize, stay away from Debian.

#119528 has nothing to do with this problem, #245657 is relevant.

> Please include the old Romanian locales immediately and publish them.

Get the old locales package from testing while it is still there.

Denis

Message #53 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jean-Michel POURE <jm@poure.com>

To: barbier@linuxfr.org (Denis Barbier)

Cc: 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#119528: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:17:35 +0200

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le lundi 26 Avril 2004 22:54, Denis Barbier a écrit :
> Get the old locales package from testing while it is still there.

Dear Denis,

Impossible, because I would need to downgrade to the testing version of Glibc, 
which would break a bunch of packages in SID. 

IMHO, the question here is also a question of responsability.

People uploading a package in SID should at least test it in SID,
even if SID is considered unstable.

Why not upgrade Locales with the old ro_RO
and take your time to study this problem?

It can take a long time and there is no such time
for the thousands of people waiting.

Regards, Jean-Michel Pouré
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAjhckextoHHj2YFMRAh4CAJ9BcQfU4lsU1xtqvjJShjq2VeE65wCgj0nS
ckIX+AyIfnsw4eEuFyIjIdw=
=G+Fb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #58 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jeff Bailey <jbailey@raspberryginger.com>

To: jm@poure.com, 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#119528: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:31:11 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 05:29, Jean-Michel POURE wrote:

> I am stuck and cannot use PostgreSQL any longer. This is quite a disaster for 
> me. In the future, can you test and discuss your changes first on a mailing 
> list and "test". At least, testing means installing on a SID station when 
> published on SID. Otherwize, stay away from Debian.

It is generally safe to assume that glibc goes through a fair amount of
testing before each upload, and given the range of locales that we all
(the maintainers) use: Japanese, localised English, French, it probably
safe to assume that not all locales are broken in a strange and hideous
way.

Being rude isn't the best way to move your issue to the top of the TODO
list.

Tks,
Jeff Bailey

-- 
I never know what to expect when you respond to my postings. No insult
intended, you are merely a surprise :)
 - Carlos O'Donnell

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #63 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Jean-Michel POURE <jm@poure.com>

To: Jeff Bailey <jbailey@raspberryginger.com>

Cc: 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#119528: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 16:09:40 +0200

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> It is generally safe to assume that glibc goes through a fair amount of
> testing before each upload, and given the range of locales that we all
> (the maintainers) use: Japanese, localised English, French, it probably
> safe to assume that not all locales are broken in a strange and hideous
> way.

Sorry, I was not refering to complex debugging
but to a normal installation test like:

dpkg --install package.deb

I was not asking to test any locale but to test a minimal installation of the 
package itself. This is not being rude asking for such a test before 
uploading.

Now, the situation is that all SID locales are broken, not only ro_RO. As a 
consequence, it is likely to believe that the new Debian installer will not 
be able to ship beta 4 for SID. 

Best regards,
Jean-Michel Pouré
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAjmmqextoHHj2YFMRAm6dAJ4yap11q7QfJd0srmWRgOxwZ6RooACffnAx
R9KDagmTIcYyTAuih2F4vs8=
=bRtx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #68 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Jean-Michel POURE" <jm@poure.com>

To: "Jeff Bailey" <jbailey@raspberryginger.com>

Cc: 119528@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#119528: Debian SID locales broken

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 19:02:30 +0100

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> It is generally safe to assume that glibc goes through a fair amount of
> testing before each upload, and given the range of locales that we all
> (the maintainers) use: Japanese, localised English, French, it probably
> safe to assume that not all locales are broken in a strange and hideous
> way.

Sorry, I was not refering to complex debugging
but to a normal installation test like:

dpkg --install package.deb

I was not asking to test any locale but to test a minimal installation of the 
package itself. This is not being rude asking for such a test before 
uploading.

Now, the situation is that all SID locales are broken, not only ro_RO. As a 
consequence, it is likely to believe that the new Debian installer will not 
be able to ship beta 4 for SID. 

Best regards,
Jean-Michel Pouré
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAjmmqextoHHj2YFMRAm6dAJ4yap11q7QfJd0srmWRgOxwZ6RooACffnAx
R9KDagmTIcYyTAuih2F4vs8=
=bRtx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #79 received at 347173-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>

To: 347173-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#347173: fixed in glibc 2.3.6-3

Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 20:17:13 -0800

Source: glibc
Source-Version: 2.3.6-3

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
glibc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

glibc-doc_2.3.6-3_all.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.6-3_all.deb
glibc_2.3.6-3.diff.gz
  to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6-3.diff.gz
glibc_2.3.6-3.dsc
  to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6-3.dsc
libc6-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-dbg_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-dbg_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-dev-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-dev-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-dev_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-dev_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-i686_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-i686_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-pic_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-pic_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-prof_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-prof_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libc6-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
libc6_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
libnss-dns-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libnss-dns-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
libnss-files-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/libnss-files-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
locales_2.3.6-3_all.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/locales_2.3.6-3_all.deb
nscd_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
  to pool/main/g/glibc/nscd_2.3.6-3_i386.deb



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 347173@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> (supplier of updated glibc package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Wed,  1 Mar 2006 17:11:36 +0100
Source: glibc
Binary: libc0.1-prof libc6-dev-amd64 libc6-i686 libc6-dev-ppc64 libc0.3-pic glibc-doc libc0.3 libc0.1-i686 libc6.1-dev libc6-s390x libnss-files-udeb libc6-dev-sparc64 libc6-i386 libc0.3-dev libc6-udeb libc6-dbg libc6.1-pic libc6-dev libc0.3-prof libc6-sparcv9 libc0.1-udeb libc6-dev-i386 libc6.1-prof libc0.1-dev locales libc6-pic libc0.3-udeb libc6-dev-powerpc libc0.1-pic libc6-ppc64 libc0.3-dbg libc0.1-dbg libc6-amd64 libc0.1 libc6-prof libc6-powerpc libc6 libc6-sparcv9b libc6.1-udeb libc6.1-dbg nscd libc6-sparc64 libnss-dns-udeb libc6.1 libc6-dev-s390x
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 2.3.6-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers <debian-glibc@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>
Description: 
 glibc-doc  - GNU C Library: Documentation
 libc6      - GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone data
 libc6-amd64 - GNU C Library: 64bit Shared libraries for AMD64
 libc6-dbg  - GNU C Library: Libraries with debugging symbols
 libc6-dev  - GNU C Library: Development Libraries and Header Files
 libc6-dev-amd64 - GNU C Library: 64bit Development Libraries for AMD64
 libc6-i686 - GNU C Library: Shared libraries [i686 optimized]
 libc6-pic  - GNU C Library: PIC archive library
 libc6-prof - GNU C Library: Profiling Libraries
 libc6-udeb - GNU C Library: Shared libraries - udeb (udeb)
 libnss-dns-udeb - GNU C Library: NSS helper for DNS - udeb (udeb)
 libnss-files-udeb - GNU C Library: NSS helper for files - udeb (udeb)
 locales    - GNU C Library: National Language (locale) data [support]
 nscd       - GNU C Library: Name Service Cache Daemon
Closes: 301438 347173 352620
Changes: 
 glibc (2.3.6-3) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   [ Aurelien Jarno]
   * Use a shell function instead of ifneq when testing a variable depending on
     $(curpass), otherwise it is only evaluated at the first pass.
   * Add support for the ppc64 architecture.  (Closes: #301438).
   * Use the new slibdir, libdir, rtlddir variables to build the various
     flavours of the libc. Put them directly in the final directory, and
     remove the corresponding tweaks done after the make install phase.
   * Install the 32-bit libraries in /emul/ia32-linux(/usr)/lib on amd64.
   * Only create the multiarch directories and the symlinks in /lib/ldconfig
     for the main pass. Otherwise alternate libraries would conflict with the
     main one when using multiarch.
   * Fix the build-dependencies for kfreebsd-amd64.
   * Add sysdeps/kfreebsd-amd64.mk and add kfreebsd-amd64 to
     rules.d/control.mk.
   * Make libc6-i386-dev conflicts with all versions of ia32-libs-dev. As it
     won't be built anymore on amd64, this will automatically remove it during
     the upgrade.
 .
   [ Clint Adams ]
   * Get rid of -o as a binary operator to [ in tzconfig and postinst.
 .
   [ Denis Barbier ]
   * Update localedata/locales/ro_RO.  Thanks Eddy Petrişor.  (Closes: #347173)
   * Bump LOCALES_DEP_VER to 2.3.6-2.  All locales can be compiled with
     localedef from 2.3.6-2 and 2.3.6-3.  (Closes: #352620)
   * Updated Italian debconf translation, by Luca Monducci.
Files: 
 c2c907935bec5e2b9a18427209bc7323 2061 libs required glibc_2.3.6-3.dsc
 5303342506b669647b5202e6976a0e1c 653158 libs required glibc_2.3.6-3.diff.gz
 22be752b50f77232bd681835a1f166a2 3351178 doc optional glibc-doc_2.3.6-3_all.deb
 96eae6f31584bb455bb4cb2f94d6f340 3925264 libs standard locales_2.3.6-3_all.deb
 419ba17d982b81f7ba7a85ce92316d6e 5158576 libs required libc6_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 6e009dd333cc6e45f4acabe44baddc0f 2733842 libdevel standard libc6-dev_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 4e1bc14aa6f2fb6727da934eed1b6d63 1306362 libdevel extra libc6-prof_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 18935697732ae6c0e1b50d28a1020ed0 1076046 libdevel optional libc6-pic_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 e844c24bac560acddaec5e17a1b12a60 1075992 libs extra libc6-i686_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 b45a77bcf5058f6ad6bdfd836fbb6d66 3269922 libs standard libc6-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 495398843de103d1bef78b2ae5b110da 2012022 libdevel optional libc6-dev-amd64_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 dde2ed634b2a44cf5a16593c60d7179b 132886 admin optional nscd_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 e967e7a02f5ce15b44c1bce33a2b3140 6507940 libdevel extra libc6-dbg_2.3.6-3_i386.deb
 9e9f8c2a77243039682f2ac567d5b8eb 742040 debian-installer extra libc6-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
 bc5bad2d94de8be5f8e761691236fdd0 8680 debian-installer extra libnss-dns-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
 c95df368accef5e2fc00c156d8a64b88 15540 debian-installer extra libnss-files-udeb_2.3.6-3_i386.udeb
Package-Type: udeb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEBmsEw3ao2vG823MRAgSWAJ9NMLKN6/RK93m36HVQjZGJbPizawCfQTdx
Ah6vfvhCkY5z7VbI6ypV1Zk=
=umZ0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #84 received at 119528@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ionel Mugurel Ciobica <tgakic@chem.tue.nl>

To: 119528@bugs.debian.org, 347173@bugs.debian.org, debian-glibc@lists.debian.org

Subject: Re: locales support for Romanian

Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 15:01:40 +0100

Hi all,

I agree with and I welcome the new changes proposed by Eddy Petrișor
to the ro_RO file.

Best regards,

        Ionel Ciobica

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.