Subject: Re: Should libc's toplevel Makefile add -DNLS to CFLAGS?
To: None <tech-userlevel@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Zdenek Salvet <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/05/1994 11:14:38
"J.T. Conklin" <email@example.com> wrote:
> Rebuttal of for position:
> 1. Most NetBSD users are from english speaking countries; thus
> NLS is useless to most of our user base.
1) I'm not from english speaking country, but I prefer original english
messages anyway (I have enough experience with localized MSDOS progs
- one often needs to reverse engineer english wording to understand
the Czech translation)
2) I think it's possible to link libcwithNLS.so instead libcwithoutNLS.so
with dynamic executable in runtime through change of LD_LIBRARY_PATH
(or file replacement when system-wide decission is made)
=> I'd disable -DNLS by default.
> Rebuttal of against position:
> 1. It's not that much bigger or that much slower that it
> matters. In fact, I have versions of the NLS functions
> that sit atop BSD's DB instead of their own database format
> that would make the differences even smaller.
> 2. It's not that difficult to change NLS to have __cat*
> functions that are called from within the library; and cat*
> functions that call the __cat* functions to supply the
> X/Open NLS API. We could even weak symbols and linker
> magic to do this, so there would be no overhead.
Both improvements will be welcome even if NLS is not used by default.
Masaryk University,Czech Republic