> >As one longing-for-I18N user, I have no idea and any option is
> >okay. :) My only hope is that more sophisticated design will be
> >adopted.

I meant by the word "more sophisticated" for the dlopen() issue other
than the locale/I18N system design. If I understand things correctly,
these are separate problems, right?

Again, as a user, there's already a solution to use locale on
NetBSD-1.5, which was provided by minoura-san. So -current is to solve
the _nature_ of problems. I personally don't mind how long it
takes.

> 	thanks for a vote:-)
> 
> 	by "more sophisticated", do you mean that currently-standard locale
> 	model is not enough, because there's no multiple simultaneout
> 	encoding support in a process?  i can't agree more, but there's no good
> 	alternative standard (we are doing our best by putting enough glues and
> 	twists).  if you have any suggestions, please please let us know!

Catching up with I18N standards is a big step! We can be much better
off by it. As Glibc 2.2 is just out and *BSD I18N is being supported,
more free softwares are going to be internationalized.

The locale model may not be perfect, but it's okay - we have to have a
room for future pleasures. ;)

Regards,
Masao

---
Masao Uebayashi <uebayasi@soum.co.jp>