Re: libiconv port

[naddy_(_at_)_mips_(_dot_)_inka_(_dot_)_de (Christian Weisgerber)]

Vladimir Popov <pva48_(_at_)_mail_(_dot_)_ru> wrote:

> > BTW, what about the competing iconv implementation by Konstantin
> > Chuguev?
> 
> It's almost ready. Please test
> http://www.jumbo.narod.ru/src/iconv.shar

Looks fine.
I'll need to test this with an application.  mutt lends itself to
that.  Vladimir, would you please send me a test message with a
bit of Russian text (KOI8-R, ISO Cyrillic, whatever, but it should
be correctly declared)?

I just noticed that we're going to have a potential problem here.
libiconv and iconv will conflict so we don't want to have different
ports depending on different iconv implementations.

> 1) base set of charsets in iconv-2.0 is nearly useless
> 
> 2) iconv could be made as a static library. So charsets in
> iconv-extra-2.0 that configured as dynamic libs will be lost.
> 
> I'm going to make iconv-rfc1345-2.0 as a flavor. Any opinion?

I don't have any particular opinion either way (i.e. separate ports
vs. a combined one).

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy_(_at_)_mips_(_dot_)_inka_(_dot_)_de