[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: not i18ned part in b-f 2.2.15


In <oag0ofesy6.fsf@arroz.fake>,
 on "08 Aug 2000 10:19:29 -0400",
 with "Re: not i18ned part in b-f 2.2.15",
  Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> wrote:

> Akira YOSHIYAMA <yosshy@cts.ne.jp> writes:
> > Surely, we can do with basedisks.sh hacking. But, it makes the script
> > more complex and dirty.
> Are we talking about woody or potato?  If woody, then sure, lets find
> a cleaner way to do it.  If woody, however, it doesn't matter all that
> much since the system will be gutted very soon, and basedisks.sh will
> cease to exist.

I think I am talking about potato (it may be a point release), 
and yes I think the quick and easy hack can be done for potato b-f.
Since the overall rewrite will be done for woody, doing it at this
stage is not effective approach.

Can you provide me a patch to modify basedisks.sh, yosshy ?

> > If we have i18ned console tools, termwrap is a very good choice.
> > It's better than every tool considers terminal emulator for users.
> > 
> > And then.... we can merge termwrap and sensible-x-terminal-emulator.
> > It provides us more unified i18n terminal environment.
> Quite.  But the woody vs potato argument comes up again.  I doubt such
> a change can be made in potato X11 packages at this point.

Maybe not.  Anyway, since termwrap has benefit on potato base system,
I think we can work to put it in our boot-floppies.

I have not created my patch to add the support for "language add-on pack"
yet, but I wish to have it for potato...

  Taketoshi Sano: <sano@debian.org>,<sano@debian.or.jp>,<kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>

Reply to: