sre is broken in SuSE 9.2

[Serge Orlov]

"Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Serge Orlov wrote:
>  > To summarize the discussion: either it's a bug in glibc or there
> is an
>> option to specify modern POSIX locale. POSIX locale consist of
>> characters from the portable character set, unicode is certainly
>> portable.
>
> Yes, but U+00E4 is not in the portable character set. The portable
> character set is defined here:
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xbd/charset.html

Thanks for the link. They write (in 1997 or earlier ?):

 The wide-character value for each member of the Portable
Character Set will equal its value when used as the lone character
 in an integer character constant. Wide-character codes for other
characters are locale- and *implementation-dependent*

Emphasis is mine. So how many libc implementations with
non-unicode wide-character codes do we have in 2005?
I'm really interested to know.

  Serge.