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

Bug#656906: win32-loader: [INTL:sr@latin] Serbian Latin templates translation

Quoting Karolina Kalic (karolina@resenje.org):

We probably need to check a few things to be sure that the Latin
version of Serbian can be supported in win32-loader as it indeed
requires support of the language in Nsis installer.

> #. translate:
> #. This must be a valid string recognised by Nsis.  If your
> #. language is not yet supported by Nsis, please translate the
> #. missing Nsis part first.
> #.
> #: win32-loader.sh:36
> #: win32-loader.c:39
> msgid "LANG_ENGLISH"
> msgstr "LANG_SERBIAN"
> #. translate:
> #. This must be the string used by GNU iconv to represent the charset used
> #. by Windows for your language.  If you don't know, check
> #. [wine]/tools/wmc/lang.c, or http://www.microsoft.com/globaldev/reference/WinCP.mspx
> #.
> #. IMPORTANT: In the rest of this file, only the subset of UTF-8 that can be
> #. converted to this charset should be used.
> #: win32-loader.sh:52
> msgid "windows-1252"
> msgstr "windows-1251"
> #. translate:
> #. Charset used by NTLDR in your localised version of Windows XP.  If you
> #. don't know, maybe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page helps.
> #: win32-loader.sh:57
> msgid "cp437"
> msgstr "cp855"
> #. translate:
> #. The name of your language _in English_ (must be restricted to ascii)
> #: win32-loader.sh:67
> msgid "English"
> msgstr "Serbian"

The first three should be check. I woul dbe surprised if the NSIS language
definition would be the same for Serbian (cyrillic) and Serbian
(Latin). The same stands for the Windows charsets.

Finally, I think that the name of the language in English should be
"Serbian (Latin)" for sr@latin.

All this requires online work and research and explains why I may not
commit the translations immediately. Of course, Didier "Odyx" Raboud
(who better knows "his" package than me) might come up with comments
and decide about what to do...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: