Debian Bug report logs - #347173
locales:Romanian locale broken in several ways

Toggle useless messages

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

From: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 09:29:40 +0200

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

Package: glibc
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch

Hello,

The current glibc version contains several errors which are corrected
by the attached patch:
* locales/ro_RO: Correct the sorting order of the letters a
  circumflex and a with breve according to the Romanian alphabet.
* locales/ro_RO: Do not use capital A with breve within day names
* locales/ro_RO: Use Romanian post-92 writing rules within day
  and abday


Please patch debian sources until upstream integrates it.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[glibc_ro_RO_fix_day_abday_letterorder.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:05:48 +0100

reassign 347173 locales
thanks

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:29:40AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> Package: glibc
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The current glibc version contains several errors which are corrected
> by the attached patch:
> * locales/ro_RO: Correct the sorting order of the letters a
>   circumflex and a with breve according to the Romanian alphabet.
> * locales/ro_RO: Do not use capital A with breve within day names
> * locales/ro_RO: Use Romanian post-92 writing rules within day
>   and abday
> 
> Please patch debian sources until upstream integrates it.

Hi Eddy,

could you please have a look at #119528?
I do not know what to do with this bugreport.

Denis

Message #17 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:58:55 +0200

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

severity 347173 minor
thanks

> > Please patch debian sources until upstream integrates it.

I have sent a patch and bug in upstream at
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2125

Currently I have contacted Mr. George Prutean (a known Romanian
linguist) that, hopefully will put me in contact with somebody at the
Academy and we will clarify this issue.

> Hi Eddy,
>
> could you please have a look at #119528?
> I do not know what to do with this bugreport.

Note: I have answered regarding all the changes that I could check

Coding iso-8859-16 - is not that widely used in Romania and
applications that support it are really rare. As etch's (secondary)
target is usage of UTF-8 and currently most people use iso-8859-2 or
utf-8 I propose that we switch to utf-8 (support is still scarce -
note the mc issues, mailers issues and so on) or stick momentanely
with -2 (but will have to switch later to UTF-8).

abday: This is wired, all days are reduced to one letter (preceded by
one space) except Tuesday and Wednesday. These are two letters wide as
the Romanian equivalents start both with letter m. So the
abbreviations are " D", " L", "Ma", "Mi", " J", " V", " S" instead of
"Du", "Lu", "Ma", "Mi", "Jo", "Vi", "Sâ".

To be honest the mostly used abbreviations are " D", " L", " M", " M",
" J", " V", " S" (yes, with the confusion embedded ;-) and I think
Ionel was trying to address this issue and make  the abbreviations not
weird to Romanians (Jo and Sâ are the most weird), but my honest
oppinion is that he two letter abbreviation is better.

[I tested at home on a gentoo system the localization of the date with
Ionel's ro_RO file]

Note: the << >> signs were produced by the test.sh script, see sources.

Attached are the results of the tests. What I can say is that:
- as one can easily see the default ro_RO locale is broken (not recognised)
- the ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 is not recognised (I feel that I am doing
something wrong here)
- Saturday has the pre-92 orthography (î instead of â)
- Tuesday is written with the correct code for t, - t comma below
(U021B); There is, however, the fear that using 21B might induce
compatibility problems (Windows has no real support for t comma)
- there is no transliteration available for ţ (21B), ş(219) (and their
upper case counter parts) to the
incorrect-but-looking-right-highly-used-preently t cedilla, s cedilla
- so if 21B is not available, then one will see nothing (afair it was
not transliteration to t either)
- it is correct to use lower case characters for a month name and day
name (ianuarie instead of Ianuarie and luni instead of Luni)
- I am still uncertain if the abbreviated month should be capitalised,
but I recall that it shouldn't be (so, ian is correct instead of Ian)
- the date format is weird: the result of LC_ALL=ro_RO.UTF-8
LANG=ro_RO.UTF-8 date is "joi, 12 ianuarie 2006, 08h 44'26''", but
nobody uses this format for displaying time (although is correct for
geographical locations :) . Instead locale's time representation <<
08:44:26 >> should be used.
- AFAIK, the correct abmon for Noiembrie is "nov" (due to the latin
origin oof the month name - I don't know why the abmon for ianuarie,
iunie, iulie are not jan jun jul, but as I can see this exception is
consistent as all are starting with "i")
- I haven't tested the number groupping and the decimal separator but
they should be "." for groups' separation and "," for decimal simbol
(how can I test this?)
- the current Romanian alphabet has 31 letters (the 26 letters in the
English one + ăâîşţ) and they are inserted as follows : ă, â after a,
ş after s, ţ after t. Yes, Q W and Y are a part of the alphabet,
contrary to Ionel's statement.
- abday as Ionel implemented has several flaws: It is inconsistent,
can't be alligned properly on the left, it is rarely used except in
calendars, where there is a disambiguity even if one letter
abbreviations are used.

The ISO-8859-2 encoding has t cedilla and s cedilla (which are
incorrect, but widely used in Romania) while -16 has indeed t comma
and s comma, but I think the one true solution is to use UTF-8 by
default in Romanian.

It is corect that t cedilla belongs to no nation and it is incorrect,
but many fonts have a representation for t sedilla code, but most of
them are represented as t comma and support is present.

The Y for yes is welcome, as many applications are half translated or
not at all translated in Romanian. This is a good safety net.

The two letter abday Lu Ma Mi Jo Vi Sâ Du has none of the afore
mentioned problems.

I am working on a better solution and waiting for the input for the
Academy, then I will send another mail.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[tests_glibc_ciobica.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

[test.sh (application/x-sh, attachment)]

Message #22 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:41:10 +0200

> Attached are the results of the tests. What I can say is that:
> - as one can easily see the default ro_RO locale is broken (not recognised)
> - the ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 is not recognised (I feel that I am doing
> something wrong here)

I made the patching over the glibc with my patch and tested it. The
ro_RO locale looks the same as in the tests for Ionel's patch.
Apparently there is something that I don't understand in the gentoo
system. (testing with Gentoo as I don't have an Internet connection at
home and my appartment mate has gentoo installed).
So I misjudged when I said that the ro_RO locale is broken.


--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #29 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:57:46 +0100

On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 09:41:10AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> > Attached are the results of the tests. What I can say is that:
> > - as one can easily see the default ro_RO locale is broken (not recognised)
> > - the ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 is not recognised (I feel that I am doing
> > something wrong here)
> 
> I made the patching over the glibc with my patch and tested it. The
> ro_RO locale looks the same as in the tests for Ionel's patch.
> Apparently there is something that I don't understand in the gentoo
> system. (testing with Gentoo as I don't have an Internet connection at
> home and my appartment mate has gentoo installed).
> So I misjudged when I said that the ro_RO locale is broken.

You can check with 'localedef --help' where locales are looked at;
on Debian:
  System's directory for character maps : /usr/share/i18n/charmaps
                         repertoire maps: /usr/share/i18n/repertoiremaps
                         locale path    : /usr/lib/locale:/usr/share/i18n

The other important point is whether your system has a single archive
file (/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive) or multiple directories
(/usr/lib/locale/ro_RO.utf8, etc.).  This is controlled by the
--no-archive flag of localedef.  You can generate both to make sure that
you are overriding system locales:
  $ localedef -i /path/to/ro_RO -f UTF-8 ro_RO.UTF-8
  $ localedef -i /path/to/ro_RO -f UTF-8 --no-archive ro_RO.UTF-8
Maybe gentoo modified the default behavior, and added an --archive flag
instead?  If an absolute path is not specified for the -i flag, locale
source file is searched in . and $I18NPATH. 
You check then your changes by requesting some informations:
  $ locale -k charmap day abday mon abmon

But if you want to compare your locale to the default one, a simpler
alternative is to build your locale into a different location, for
instance:
  $ export LOCPATH=$(mktemp -d)
  $ localedef -i /path/to/ro_RO -f UTF-8 $LOCPATH/ro_RO.UTF-8
  $ locale -k charmap day abday mon abmon
Compare with default settings
  $ unset LOCPATH
  $ locale -k charmap day abday mon abmon
If you do not find your changes on output, you can run
  $ strace -e open locale -k charmap day abday mon abmon
to check which files are read.

Denis

Message #34 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 09:59:40 +0200

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

On 1/13/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> You can check with 'localedef --help' where locales are looked at;
> on Debian:
>   System's directory for character maps : /usr/share/i18n/charmaps
>                          repertoire maps: /usr/share/i18n/repertoiremaps
>                          locale path    : /usr/lib/locale:/usr/share/i18n
>

Yesterday i found some more time towork on this issue and cam up with
the attached patch, but I still have some questions in order to be
sure I am doing the right thing:

- What is the purpose of d_t_fmt and date_fmt? What's the difference
between them?
- What is name_gen?

> But if you want to compare your locale to the default one, a simpler
> alternative is to build your locale into a different location, for
> instance:

I haven't tested yet this patch, but I hope to test it before the weekend.


See the changelog for modifications.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[ro_RO_massive_fix.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #39 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 10:24:08 +0100

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 09:59:40AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> - What is the purpose of d_t_fmt and date_fmt? What's the difference
> between them?

See this thread:
  http://sources.redhat.com/ml/bug-glibc/2000-03/msg00140.html

> - What is name_gen?

  name_gen   The operand is a string defining a salutation valid
             for all persons, example: the Japanese "-san"
	     salutation.

But LC_NAME is unused, so you do not have to worry if there is no easy
answer for your locale.

Denis

Message #44 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:29:31 +0100

On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 09:59:40AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> See the changelog for modifications.
> +	* locales/ro_RO: After denomination, int'l currency symbol is RON

I do not understand what "After denomination" does mean.  You may need
references when bugging upstream with this change, here is one:
  http://publications.eu.int/code/en/en-5000700.htm
IMO you should also include a patch against locale/iso-4217.def,
otherwise your locale will not compile.

Denis

Message #49 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 14:17:21 +0200

On 2/10/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 09:59:40AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> > See the changelog for modifications.
> > +     * locales/ro_RO: After denomination, int'l currency symbol is RON
>
> I do not understand what "After denomination" does mean.  You may need
> references when bugging upstream with this change, here is one:
>   http://publications.eu.int/code/en/en-5000700.htm

Thanks, I guess you were reffering to :
"On 1 July 2005, the addition of the new Romanian leu (RON). The
former Romanian leu will remain in circulation until 31 December 2006
(RON 1 = ROL 10 000)."

this might be ok, too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_leu

> IMO you should also include a patch against locale/iso-4217.def,
> otherwise your locale will not compile.

thanks for the tip


--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #54 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 14:31:55 +0100

On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 02:17:21PM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> On 2/10/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 09:59:40AM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> > > See the changelog for modifications.
> > > +     * locales/ro_RO: After denomination, int'l currency symbol is RON
> >
> > I do not understand what "After denomination" does mean.  You may need
> > references when bugging upstream with this change, here is one:
> >   http://publications.eu.int/code/en/en-5000700.htm
> 
> Thanks, I guess you were reffering to :
> "On 1 July 2005, the addition of the new Romanian leu (RON). The
> former Romanian leu will remain in circulation until 31 December 2006
> (RON 1 = ROL 10 000)."

Yes.

> this might be ok, too:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_leu

No.  Especially for changes in ISO codes, upstream requests some
official sources.

Denis

Message #59 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:33:15 +0200

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

On 2/10/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> > > I do not understand what "After denomination" does mean.  You may need
> > > references when bugging upstream with this change, here is one:
> > >   http://publications.eu.int/code/en/en-5000700.htm

I have worked last night on the finalization of the glibc patch for
Romanian locale.

I have added comments that would make it clear for everybody about the
situation of the ro_RO locale and why it has been changed.
I have made a reference to the link above and explained the change (I
have modified the currency reference definitions in
locale/iso-4217.def so no error would be generated)




All is fine and dandy on my side except the LC_ADDRESS field, where I
haven't found any refference to a method to test the postal_fmt.

Could you help with this issue? The correct format for RO should be:

Name
Street, street number (if any), (here follows the block, stairs,
floor, flat  - if any) (after the street number, there could be a new
line)
sector (only for the capital - Bucharest), city/town/village name,
postal code (sometimes not written), county (in Romanian "judeţ")
phone
fax
country


Notes:
- the line containig the postal code can sometimes have the format:
postal code, city/town/village name, county (in Romanian "judeţ")
- adding the phone and fax info sometimes leads to the leimination of
the country information
- country info is (probably as in many other places) optional and
always appears on the last position
- having a postal box changes a little the format (see below)




If the format, as it is now, is of the format above, then the attached
patch should fix the locale issues for Romanian.


===========================================
Here are some address format examples:

The Ministry of Clture and Cults
http://www.cultura.ro/Documents.aspx?ID=60

Adresa Ministerului Culturii si Cultelor:  Soseaua Kiseleff, Nr. 30,
Sector 1, 011374 Bucuresti




The Ministry of External Affaris
http://www.mae.ro/index.php?unde=doc&id=5447&idlnk=2&cat=4

          o Adresa: Aleea Alexandru nr. 31, Sector 1, Bucureşti
          o Telefon: (40 21) 319.21.08 sau 319.21.25
          o Fax: (40 21) 319.21.73
          o Website: http://www.mae.ro
          o E-mail: mae@mae.ro



Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural Development
http://www.gov.ro/engleza/guvernul/afis-minister.php?idmin=29

Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural Development
Adresa: Bucuresti, B-dul Carol I, nr. 24, sector 3, codul postal
020921, oficiul postal 37;
E-mail: comunicare@maa.ro;


Romanian Government
http://www.guv.ro/obiective/afis-docdiverse.php?iddoc=298

Piata Victoriei nr. 1, sector 1 , Bucuresti
Telefon: +40-21-314 34 00, 230 36 60


The Ministry of Education and Research
http://www.edu.ro/

Ministerul Educaţiei şi Cercetării
Str. Gen. Berthelot 28-30
Sector 1, 010174, Bucureşti
Tel. Centrală: 4056200;4056300
Tel. Ministru: 4056223;4056208
Tel. Cercetare: 3192326



Ministry of Communication and Information Technology
http://www.mcti.ro/624.html?PHPSESSID=45fd39fa099ae53f00d2e59b37a020a0

Ministerul Comunicaţiilor şi Tehnologiei Informaţiei
Bulevardul Libertăţii Nr. 14
Sector 5, Cod 050706
Bucureşti
România

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[ro_RO_massive_fix-20060221.diff.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

Message #64 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:36:48 +0200

On 2/21/06, Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> wrote:
> All is fine and dandy on my side except the LC_ADDRESS field, where I
> haven't found any refference to a method to test the postal_fmt.
>
> Could you help with this issue? The correct format for RO should be:

In fact my problem is that I didn't had the meaning (and options) for
the postal format, but I just found them:

http://www.catatec.ch/vpipermail/gnu-rumantsch/2003q4/000003.html


I will double check with this new info and hopefuly tomorrow, this
will be complete.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #71 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 23:15:01 +0100

On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 02:33:15PM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> On 2/10/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> > > > I do not understand what "After denomination" does mean.  You may need
> > > > references when bugging upstream with this change, here is one:
> > > >   http://publications.eu.int/code/en/en-5000700.htm
> 
> I have worked last night on the finalization of the glibc patch for
> Romanian locale.
> 
> I have added comments that would make it clear for everybody about the
> situation of the ro_RO locale and why it has been changed.
> I have made a reference to the link above and explained the change (I
> have modified the currency reference definitions in
> locale/iso-4217.def so no error would be generated)

Hi Eddy,

Your comments in ro_RO are very helpful, but they must not appear within a
list, like in 'day'.

Eveything looks fine, I will commit your patch against the locales package.
The RON currency code has already been added and will be recognized by
localedef 2.3.6-2, locale changes will be applied against 2.3.6-3.
This 2-step approach is to ensure that locales are not broken in
unstable, since locales is Architecture: all and may be available before
localedef.

> All is fine and dandy on my side except the LC_ADDRESS field, where I
> haven't found any refference to a method to test the postal_fmt.

IMO you do not have to worry much about this field, I do not know of any
application that uses it.

One last question though: what is the first day to be displayed by a
calendar in Romania?  You may set first_weekday in LC_TIME accordingly
(1=Sunday ... 7=Saturday)

You may also define
  lang_term "<U0072><U006F><U006E>"
  lang_lib  "<U0072><U0075><U006D>"
in LC_ADDRESS.

Denis

Message #76 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:42:49 +0200

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

On 2/22/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> > I have added comments that would make it clear for everybody about the
> > situation of the ro_RO locale and why it has been changed.
> > I have made a reference to the link above and explained the change (I
> > have modified the currency reference definitions in
> > locale/iso-4217.def so no error would be generated)
>
> Hi Eddy,
>
> Your comments in ro_RO are very helpful, but they must not appear within a
> list, like in 'day'.

I saw that when I tested the changes last night ;-)

> Eveything looks fine, I will commit your patch against the locales package.
> The RON currency code has already been added and will be recognized by

Note for myself: Then I guess the change was done by adding RON, not
by replacing ROL (as I did initially)

> > All is fine and dandy on my side except the LC_ADDRESS field, where I
> > haven't found any refference to a method to test the postal_fmt.
>
> IMO you do not have to worry much about this field, I do not know of any
> application that uses it.

Nonetheless I have fixed and tested this (as much as I could - see
attachments and below).

> One last question though: what is the first day to be displayed by a
> calendar in Romania?  You may set first_weekday in LC_TIME accordingly
> (1=Sunday ... 7=Saturday)

Monday

> You may also define
>   lang_term "<U0072><U006F><U006E>"
>   lang_lib  "<U0072><U0075><U006D>"

lang_term "ron" ?
lang_lib "rud" ?

Are you sure?
What are the meanings of these items?

> in LC_ADDRESS.


Note: the attached patch is monolitic and replaces the ROL definition
with a RON definition (I didn't knew/realised that there should be an
addition, not a replace) so you will have to split this again.



Below is a set of comparative tests (see also attachements):
=============================================================

Note: Currency was fixed, but on the test system the definition for
the Romanian New Leu (RON) was missing.


eddy@merci testzone $/\1/g' | tr '\n' ' ' `
yesexpr="^[DdYy].*"
noexpr="^[nN].*"
int_curr_symbol="ROL "
currency_symbol="Lei"
mon_decimal_point=","
mon_thousands_sep="."
negative_sign="-"
decimal_point=","
thousands_sep="."
abday="Du;Lu;Ma;Mi;Jo;Vi;Sb"
day="duminică;luni;marţi;miercuri;joi;vineri;sâmbătă"
abmon="ian;feb;mar;apr;mai;iun;iul;aug;sep;oct;nov;dec"
mon="ianuarie;februarie;martie;aprilie;mai;iunie;iulie;august;septembrie;octombrie;noiembrie;decembrie"
d_t_fmt="%a %d %b %Y %T %z"
d_fmt="%d.%m.%Y"
t_fmt="%T"
date_fmt="%A %-e %B %Y, %H:%M:%S %z"
tel_int_fmt="+%c %a %l"
int_prefix="40"
name_fmt="%d%t%s%t%f%t%g%t%m"
name_mr="Dl."
name_mrs="D-na."
name_miss="D-ra."
postal_fmt="%f%N%a%d%N%s%t%h%N%b%t%e%t%r%N%z%t%T%N%S%t%c%N"
country_name="România"
country_ab2="RO"
country_ab3="ROU"
country_car="RO"
lang_name="română"
lang_ab="ro"
eddy@merci testzone $ date +%x
22.02.2006
eddy@merci testzone $ date
miercuri 22 februarie 2006, 03:28:46 +0200
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060202 23:24:25"
joi 2 februarie 2006, 23:24:25 +0200
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060502 23:24:25"
marţi 2 mai 2006, 23:24:25 +0300
eddy@merci testzone $ date +%c
Mi 22 feb 2006 03:53:49 +0200
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060502 23:24:25" +%c
Ma 02 mai 2006 23:24:25 +0300
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060202 23:24:25" +%c
Jo 02 feb 2006 23:24:25 +0200




eddy@merci testzone $ unset LOCPATH
eddy@merci testzone $/\1/g' | tr '\n' ' ' `
yesexpr="^[DdYy].*"
noexpr="^[nN].*"
int_curr_symbol="ROL "
currency_symbol="Lei"
mon_decimal_point=","
mon_thousands_sep="."
negative_sign="-"
decimal_point=","
thousands_sep=""
abday="Du;Lu;Ma;Mi;Jo;Vi;Sî"
day="DuminicĂ;Luni;Marţi;Miercuri;Joi;Vineri;SîmbĂtĂ"
abmon="ian;feb;mar;apr;mai;iun;iul;aug;sep;oct;nov;dec"
mon="Ianuarie;Februarie;Martie;Aprilie;Mai;Iunie;Iulie;August;Septembrie;Octombrie;Noiembrie;Decembrie"
d_t_fmt="%a %d %b %Y %T %Z"
d_fmt="%Y-%m-%d"
t_fmt="%T"
date_fmt="%a %b %e %H:%M:%S %Z %Y"
tel_int_fmt="+%c %a %l"
int_prefix="40"
name_fmt="%d%t%g%t%m%t%f"
name_mr=""
name_mrs=""
name_miss=""
postal_fmt="%f%N%a%N%d%N%b%N%s %h %e %r%N%%z %T%N%c%N"
country_name=""
country_ab2="RO"
country_ab3="ROU"
country_car=""
lang_name=""
lang_ab=""
eddy@merci testzone $ date +%x
2006-02-22
eddy@merci testzone $ date
Mi feb 22 03:32:43 EET 2006
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060202 23:24:25"
Jo feb  2 23:24:25 EET 2006
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060502 23:24:25"
Ma mai  2 23:24:25 EEST 2006
eddy@merci testzone $ date +%c
Mi 22 feb 2006 03:54:04 EET
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060502 23:24:25" +%c
Ma 02 mai 2006 23:24:25 EEST
eddy@merci testzone $ date -d "20060202 23:24:25" +%c
Jo 02 feb 2006 23:24:25 EET



--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[ro_RO_massive_fix-200602220336.diff.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

[ro_RO_old_test.sh.txt.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

[ro_RO_new_test.sh.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

Message #81 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:56:43 +0200

On 2/22/06, Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Eveything looks fine, I will commit your patch against the locales package.
[snip]
> > > All is fine and dandy on my side except the LC_ADDRESS field, where I
> > > haven't found any refference to a method to test the postal_fmt.
> >
> > IMO you do not have to worry much about this field, I do not know of any
> > application that uses it.
>
> Nonetheless I have fixed and tested this (as much as I could - see
> attachments and below).

Please note that the latest patch has some other changes than the
LC_ADDRESS, is tested and compiled, thus I recommend you use this
patch for the second step of the transition.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #88 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy =?UTF-8?Q?Petri=C5=9For ?= <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 23:36:00 +0100

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:42:49AM +0200, Eddy =?UTF-8?Q?Petri=C5=9For ?= wrote:
> > Eveything looks fine, I will commit your patch against the locales package.
> > The RON currency code has already been added and will be recognized by
> 
> Note for myself: Then I guess the change was done by adding RON, not
> by replacing ROL (as I did initially)

No, upstream will replace ROL by RON.  In the Debian locales package,
this is performed by 2 steps, as explained in my previous mail, so that
locales can be compiled with current and new localedef in unstable.
Thus RON will be added, and ROL removed at the next upload.

> > You may also define
> >   lang_term "<U0072><U006F><U006E>"
> >   lang_lib  "<U0072><U0075><U006D>"
> 
> lang_term "ron" ?
> lang_lib "rud" ?
> 
> Are you sure?
> What are the meanings of these items?

These are ISO 639-2 codes, see
  http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html
They are provided in locale/iso-639.def, this is why you could
add them.

> Note: the attached patch is monolitic and replaces the ROL definition
> with a RON definition (I didn't knew/realised that there should be an
> addition, not a replace) so you will have to split this again.

No, as explained above, please keep your patch as it is now, it
looks good.  BTW your test files do not help much, IMO you can
send your patch upstream as is without those test files.

Denis

Message #93 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:50:47 +0200

On 2/23/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:42:49AM +0200, Eddy =?UTF-8?Q?Petri=C5=9For ?= wrote:
> > > Eveything looks fine, I will commit your patch against the locales package.
> > > The RON currency code has already been added and will be recognized by
> >
> > Note for myself: Then I guess the change was done by adding RON, not
> > by replacing ROL (as I did initially)
>
> No, upstream will replace ROL by RON.  In the Debian locales package,
> this is performed by 2 steps, as explained in my previous mail, so that
> locales can be compiled with current and new localedef in unstable.
> Thus RON will be added, and ROL removed at the next upload.
>
> > > You may also define
> > >   lang_term "<U0072><U006F><U006E>"
> > >   lang_lib  "<U0072><U0075><U006D>"
> >
> > lang_term "ron" ?
> > lang_lib "rud" ?
> >
> > Are you sure?
> > What are the meanings of these items?
>
> These are ISO 639-2 codes, see
>   http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html
> They are provided in locale/iso-639.def, this is why you could
> add them.

Oh, ok. I will add this info, and also the first_weekday will be added
(I will send another patch tomorrow).

> > Note: the attached patch is monolitic and replaces the ROL definition
> > with a RON definition (I didn't knew/realised that there should be an
> > addition, not a replace) so you will have to split this again.
>
> No, as explained above, please keep your patch as it is now, it
> looks good.  BTW your test files do not help much, IMO you can
> send your patch upstream as is without those test files.

Those will help me to get confirmations from other Romanian speaking
people in case upstream says please provide an official source, and,
because the Romanian Academy is busy doing which hunting or something
simillar instead of providing some useful like official public
reference related to things like locale definitionfor Romanain, I will
need other people to confirm my changes.

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #98 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:39:46 +0200

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

On 2/23/06, Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > You may also define
> > > >   lang_term "<U0072><U006F><U006E>"
> > > >   lang_lib  "<U0072><U0075><U006D>"
> > >
> > > lang_term "ron" ?
> > > lang_lib "rud" ?
> > >
> > > Are you sure?
> > > What are the meanings of these items?
> >
> > These are ISO 639-2 codes, see
> >   http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html
> > They are provided in locale/iso-639.def, this is why you could
> > add them.
>
> Oh, ok. I will add this info, and also the first_weekday will be added
> (I will send another patch tomorrow).
>

I managed to do it today, so here it is (hopefully) the final version
of the patch for locale ro_RO.

This fixes also:
+	* locales/ro_RO: first_weekday and first_workday are both Monday
+	* locales/ro_RO: added terminology and bibliographic codes for RO
+	reference: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html#qr


Thanks for all your assistance.

Note: these latest changes were not tested yet.
--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[ro_RO_massive_fix-200602231426.diff.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

Message #103 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org>

To: Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>, 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:52:18 +0100

On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 02:39:46PM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> I managed to do it today, so here it is (hopefully) the final version
> of the patch for locale ro_RO.
> 
> This fixes also:
> +	* locales/ro_RO: first_weekday and first_workday are both Monday
> +	* locales/ro_RO: added terminology and bibliographic codes for RO
> +	reference: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html#qr

It looks good, I will commit it.
Thanks.

Denis

Message #108 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:12:28 +0200

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

On 2/23/06, Denis Barbier <barbier@linuxfr.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 02:39:46PM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote:
> > I managed to do it today, so here it is (hopefully) the final version
> > of the patch for locale ro_RO.
> >
> > This fixes also:
> > +     * locales/ro_RO: first_weekday and first_workday are both Monday
> > +     * locales/ro_RO: added terminology and bibliographic codes for RO
> > +     reference: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langcodes.html#qr
>
> It looks good, I will commit it.
> Thanks.

Of course there is an(other) update (I promise, the last which I am
doing from my own will and based on my sole reasoning) :-/

I have added the isbn code for RO and the postal code (I am not 100%
sure that is the correct one, but I don't recall seeing another one).


All the locales were tested, including ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 (explanation follows).

I order not to have a war going on  on the basis of the encoding used
by ro_RO I have created ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 as another valid locale for
ro_RO (although UTF-8 is the only encoding that displays all Roamnian
specific characters), but this modification is in an unpublished
patch.

Taking into account that UTF-8 will become the 'de facto' standard
encoding in the world (until another encoding that fixes the han
unification problem appears) I made two patches (one with
ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 locale and one without) to test them. They both
contain the isbn code and the postal code.

Notes:
- I will promote the one without ISO-8859-16 as the encoding *still*
can't encode all Romanian specific codes. Adding yet another broken
ro_RO* locale would add suplemental mess to the whole Romanian
localisation issues.
- The patch with the 8859-16 locale was made as a test to see if the
locale would work. Because so few applications are iso-8859-16 aware I
feel that introducing this locale will cause more delays towards
crossing to UTF-8 and also lots and lots of unnecessary issues.

Because of this I am sending only the patch without the
ro_RO.ISO-8859-16 locale.

Thanks for understanding.
--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

[ro_RO_massive_fix-200602240950-no-8859-16.diff.gz (application/x-gzip, attachment)]

Message #113 received at 347173@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Eddy Petrişor" <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com>

To: "Denis Barbier" <barbier@linuxfr.org>

Cc: 347173@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:17:02 +0200

On 2/24/06, Eddy Petrişor <eddy.petrisor@gmail.com> wrote:
> All the locales were tested [snip]

I have observed that 'cal' does not take into account the
first_weekday/first_workday data. Is this a cal bug? (I know there is
an option of cal to display the first week day as Monday, but that is
another issue).

--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Message #118 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 #123 received at 347173@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.