Re: I took liberty to update po for debian-faq
Hi,
Beatrice Torracca <beatricet@libero.it> wrote:
> On venerdì 15 marzo 2019, at 18:45 +0100, Holger Wansing wrote:
> > Today I committed a French translation update from
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=920492
> >
> > However, this translation seems outdated as Beatrice mentions above.
> > When I now call "make update-po", all po files (!) are changed again because
> > of changings like this:
> >
> >
> > @@ -3185,7 +3185,7 @@ msgid ""
> > "management system (dpkg) will send an error message that it also needs "
> > "<package>binutils</package>, and stop installing "
> > "<package>gcc</package>. (However, this facility can be overridden by the "
> > -"insistent user, see <manref section=\"8\" name=\"dpkg\">.) See more in <ref "
> > +"insistent user, see <manref name=\"dpkg\" section=\"8\">.) See more in <ref "
> > "id=\"depends\"> below."
>
> In the past when I saw that with make update-po all the resulting
> changes were like the one you mention, I just reverted the
> changes. With my first update-po, at least for Italian, there were
> some real "updates" with new messages and changed messages, not only
> this kind of changes with just a different order of the items in the
> tags.
>
> After all, you only need one "make update-po" after some changes in the
> original text. Then you won't need to run it again until the original
> text changes. But, yes, it is an annoying problem.
Ah, I see.
I did not expected this behaviour, but anyway: thanks for the clarification.
> > Means the "section=xxx" and "name=yyy" parts within <manref ... > are swapped,
> > leading to 18 fuzzy strings :-((
> >
> > I remember such issue from years ago. But is this still an unfixed issue?
> >
> > This way we cannot get the translations up-to-date, hrrrr ...
> >
> > Is this known? How to deal with this?
>
> See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=725931
>
> Anyway as far as I can see, the proposed work around is already implemented
> in the Makefile of the faq that already contains "PERL_PERTURB_KEYS=0
> PERL_HASH_SEED=0".
>
> > Beatrice: which Debian version are you using? I wonder if the tools in Debian
> > unstable behave different from those in Debian stable (I'm trying to explain,
> > what happens here).
> > I am using Debian stable.
>
> I am using testing.
Ok, but apparently this seems to of no relevance.
Thanks, Beatrice
Holger
--
Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Reply to: