Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gYFES-0007IY-7m for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:04:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gYFEP-0005UR-L8 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:04:09 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gYFEP-0005UK-Eq for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:04:09 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gYFEH-00078X-6T for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:04:06 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wBFJ3w8e023963; Sat, 15 Dec 2018 14:03:58 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Hugh Ranalli cc: Daniel Verite , Thomas Munro , pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #15548: Unaccent does not remove combining diacritical characters In-reply-to: <23237.1544899488@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <10200.1544713542@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5d77cc08-d582-4f83-a17f-f2c992d123a9@manitou-mail.org> <16726.1544827803@sss.pgh.pa.us> <23237.1544899488@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane message dated "Sat, 15 Dec 2018 13:44:48 -0500" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <23961.1544900638.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 14:03:58 -0500 Message-ID: <23962.1544900638@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk I wrote: > ... I get something that's bit-for-bit the same as what's in unaccent.rules. > So there's clearly a platform difference between here and there. > I'm using Python 2.6.6, which is what ships with RHEL6; have not tried > it on anything newer. A few minutes later on a Fedora 28 box: python 2.7.15 also gives me the expected results, while python 3.6.6 fails with "SyntaxError: invalid syntax". So updating that script to also work with python3 might be a worthwhile TODO item. But I'm at a loss to explain why you get different results. regards, tom lane