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

Re: gettext, etc.


On Sun, 9 Nov 1997, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> > > 	BTW, I haven't been able to build it even with the gettext in
> > > project/experimental.  Does anyone know if it needs a newer one?
> > It may need an older one. But not a newer one, because the one in
> > project/experimental is the newest (0.10.32).
>  I don't understand. Isn't the gettext library already included in libc?

Yes, GNU libc includes gettext.

>  Or you are talking about the utilities used to `compile' the *.po's.

Exactly, if we modify *any* .po, we need the msgfmt program.

> If the latter is the case... we need a working version of those
> utilities in unstable... what's the problem with that? 

Ulrich Drepper (gettext author) asked me not to distribute it as if it
were finished.

We could put it in unstable, but we would have to take it out again
if hamm becomes frozen and gettext 1.0 is not released at that time.
So this would not solve nothing.

I think an exception in the "consistency rule" should be made for
development packages that, while being free and availabe in experimental,
they are still unfinished or in beta stage, or just their authors
politely asked us not to distribute them yet.

Examples: automake, libtool, gettext, ...

We should not package betas for unstable, because unstable will always be
"frozen" some day, and later "stable".

Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1


TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: