Re: lib/57064: Import OpenBSD's script to autogen Unicode ctype definition?

[Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR lib/57064; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: lib/57064: Import OpenBSD's script to autogen Unicode ctype
 definition?
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 14:12:03 +0200

 On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 04:30:01AM +0000, rokuyama.rk%gmail.com@localhost wrote:
 > >Number:         57064
 > >Category:       lib
 > >Synopsis:       Import OpenBSD's script to autogen Unicode ctype definition?
 ...
 > (1) Generated file [3] is not completely same for characters we
 > already have. There may be possible compatibility problems. It
 > may (or may not?) be better to switch after netbsd-10 branch?
 
 Let's do it before 10 then we can get some testing done
 immediately. If we find out we need to revert, it's a single file and
 can easily be pulled up.
 
 > (2) Generated file [3] is of under Unicode license (see link [3]).
 > I'm not 100% sure whether this license is acceptable for
 > src/share/locale/ctype.
 
 The existing file already has a Unicode license at the top. Is there a
 change?
 
 > (3) I don't understand what script [2] actually does. It seems to
 > involves two conversions in principle: data supplied by Unicode
 > Consortium --> perl module --> ctype definition. I'd like to
 > clarify what exactly happens, and document it in source or commit
 > log. Perl gurus familiar to its I18N facilities?
 
 "perldoc Unicode::UCD" should help here, but I haven't looked in
 detail yet either.
 
 > (4) This is not a big problem, but we don't have perl in base.
 > Database can be generated only when explicitly indicated with
 > pkgsrc perl. Anyway, generating ctype definition takes order of
 > hours on modern Intel processor, and it is unrealistic to build
 > it every time.
 
 This is not a problem, we commit the generated file, that only needs
 to be done once per major perl version.
 
 So in short I think we should go for this soon.
 
 Other opinions?
  Thomas