From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-locales-return-5361-listarch-libc-locales=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 21854 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2017 10:43:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-locales-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-locales.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-locales-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-locales@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-locales-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: libc-locales-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 17219 invoked by uid 48); 9 Aug 2017 10:43:30 -0000
From: "maiku.fabian at gmail dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: libc-locales@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug localedata/17563] cmn_TW: add hanzi collation
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2017 13:14:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc
X-Bugzilla-Component: localedata
X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: maiku.fabian at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: maiku.fabian at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: security-
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-17563-716-9kYa9BaLcn@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-17563-716@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-17563-716@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2017-q3/txt/msg00419.txt.bz2

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D17563

--- Comment #8 from Mike FABIAN <maiku.fabian at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Wei-Lun Chao from comment #7)
> (In reply to Mike FABIAN from comment #6)
> > Should the new collation also be used for zh_TW, or only
> > for cmn_TW.
> > By the way, what is the difference between zh_TW=20
> > and cmn_TW, isn=E2=80=99t both Mandarin?
>=20
> As reasons for bug 15963, those 14 languages have been behind the
> macro-language "zh" for a long time. Technically zh_TW and cmn_TW are the
> same, but for fairness, IMHO, the locale zh_TW should be deprecated and
> replaced with cmn_TW and other chinese locales.
>=20
> Personally I would like to differentiate cmn from zh with this radical
> patch, which may be followed by similar patches against nan_TW, hak_TW,
> lzh_TW and yue_HK.

OK.=20

How to test your patch?

I did this:

Without your patch:

$ echo -e "=E9=BB=84\n=E6=9C=A8\n=E6=A9=9F\n=E6=9C=9F" | LC_ALL=3Dcmn_TW.UT=
F-8 sort
=E6=9C=9F
=E6=9C=A8
=E6=A9=9F
=E9=BB=84
$

With your patch:

$ echo -e "=E9=BB=84\n=E6=9C=A8\n=E6=A9=9F\n=E6=9C=9F" | LC_ALL=3Dcmn_TW.UT=
F-8 sort
=E6=9C=A8
=E9=BB=84
=E6=9C=9F
=E6=A9=9F
$

That seems to show that I applied your patch correctly, right?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.