Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bo Borgerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it
possible to maintain an English translation with only LC_TIME info?
Yes. I maintain an English translation by hand for GNU diffutils.
This is for LC_MESSAGES but a similar thing could be done for LC_TIME.
Eric Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: coreutils
Version: 6.10-3
Severity: normal
The --time-style=locale option to ls no longer behaves as documented.
$ locale
LANG=en_US.UTF-8
...
$ ls --version
ls (GNU coreutils) 6.10
...
$ /bin/ls --time-style=locale -l passwd
-rw-r--r--
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Odd. I see that with LC_ALL=en, it *does* work:
LC_ALL=en ./ls --time-style=locale -dl /
drwxr-xr-x 42 root root 1024 Mar 13 12:02 /
Because the en locale does not exist.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SuSE Linux
Hi,
This can affect invocations of `ls' that don't include an explicit
`--time-style=locale', as well, since that is now the default (in
absence of a TIME_STYLE environment variable).
The only case I can see in the head revision of `ls.c' where the
default English time-style is used is when
Bo Borgerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This can affect invocations of `ls' that don't include an explicit
`--time-style=locale', as well, since that is now the default (in
absence of a TIME_STYLE environment variable).
The only case I can see in the head revision of `ls.c' where the
default
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks.
That feels pretty kludgy. I hope we end up with something cleaner.
Yeah, I suppose so. Short of including `translations' for English,
though, what's a better option?
BTW, such a patch would almost certainly
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I suppose so. Short of including `translations' for English,
though, what's a better option?
What's the downside to that?
Mike Stone
Good question. My thought was because there aren't any now, but I
guess
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 12:56:19PM -0400, Bo Borgerson wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks.
That feels pretty kludgy. I hope we end up with something cleaner.
Yeah, I suppose so. Short of including `translations' for English,
though, what's
