Re: /usr/lib/locale and /usr/share/locale

1996-08-16 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
You (Christophe Le Bars) wrote: Doesn't glibc use /usr/share/locale, too? Well, I don't know... I do. That's the reason I started this thread: should it or shouldn't it? I've deciced it should, and I'm configuring glibc to use /usr/share. Now should we move /usr/lib/zoneinfo too? What

Re: /usr/lib/locale and /usr/share/locale

1996-08-16 Thread Christophe Le Bars
Doesn't glibc use /usr/share/locale, too? Well, I don't know... The only difference I'm aware of is /usr/share/i18n instead of /usr/share/nls. But then this already holds for libc5 starting with 5.4.0 The next wg15-locale package must provide a symbolic link then (/usr/share/i18n -

Re: /usr/lib/locale and /usr/share/locale

1996-08-15 Thread Christophe Le Bars
**On 14 Aug, In article /usr/lib/locale and /usr/share/locale, ** MVS (Miquel van Smoorenburg) writes: MVSA quick question (probably directed most at Ian). I notice that MVS/usr/lib/locale is part of the base system, but that nothing uses it. MVS MVSOTOH, some packages do provide /usr/share

/usr/lib/locale and /usr/share/locale

1996-08-14 Thread Miquel van Smoorenburg
what to use since the new GNU libc6 wants to know where the locale directory is, and with the new FSSTND coming up, and existing practice, etc. /usr/lib/localeor /usr/share/locale ? [I've configured it for /usr/share/locale at the moment] Mike. -- Miquel van| Cistron Internet Services