Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU

--On måndag, augusti 22, 2005 09.19.58 -0400 Bruce Momjian
<pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Palle Girgensohn wrote:
>> > I feel it makes sense to apply the smaller patch in any case, so that
>> > there's a Win32 solution not requiring ICU (ie, I can't see an argument
>> > for doing (2) rather than (3)).
>> >
>> > Comments?
>>
>> I don't mind either way, but while Win32 will work with Magnus' patch,
>> FreeBSD won't; it needs the ICU patch to work. OTH, I maintain the
>> FreeBSD port where I already have the patch as an ("experiemental")
>> option. Not every FreeBSD user uses the ports system, though.
>>
>> So, it is a question whether FreeBSD's unicode support is important or
>> not, I guess? Win32 will work both ways.
>
> How is FreeBSD's Unicode support broken? I was not aware of that.

FreeBSD has no unicode collation support. Hence the need for ICU.

/Palle