On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 10:22:00 AM CET Dmitry Belyavskiy wrote:
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 8:51 AM Kamil Dudka <kdudka(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 10:50:06 PM CET Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> said:
> > > Yes. But how many domains using idn are there? I worked on idn support
> > > in systemd, but when preparing the description of this change I
> > > that I have _never_ once used an idn domain outside of testing.
> > >
> > > And note that this is not about user-facing programs like firefox.
> > > I assume that there might be _some_ use of idn in firefox. But for
> > > command-line tools like curl this seems even less likely.
> > I'm pretty sure use of IDN domains is a regional thing. I live in the
> > US and don't see IDN domains in my normal use. But dropping support for
> > them from a core utility would be bad for those that live in regions
> > where IDN domains may be more common.
> > --
> > Chris Adams <linux(a)cmadams.net>
> If this appears to be a real problem, it is easy for us to re-enable IDN
> in libcurl-minimal, even in an update of a stable Fedora release. So I do
> not think we need to enable it proactively.
> Being from Russia and having several years of interacting with Universal
Acceptance, I'd say IDN is a must nowadays.
To be clear, I am not completely against including IDN in libcurl-minimal.
On the other hand, we removed IDN from libcurl in ubi9 images in September
and nobody has complained about it so far: