On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 07:13:08 +0100 Christian Perrier <bubulle@debian.org> wrote: > Quoting Neil Williams (codehelp@debian.org): > > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 17:49 +0000, Neil Williams wrote: > > > Does anyone here know why cupsys-common installs the PO files instead of > > > the .mo ? > > > > > > > Got the answer - it's not using a fully compliant translation model. > > Well, is there a particular reason or just something wrong in upstream > which could deserve a bug report? AFAICT, cupsys uses it's own PO files that are not gettext format (although they look a LOT like it) and it's own translation conversion scripts, presumably at runtime too. I haven't filed a bug at this stage because my concern was to see if it was a bug in my Tdeb generating script for Emdebian. Turns out that as this isn't a genuine use of gettext, the script got it right and didn't try to handle the imitation po files (which presumably would not work with cups itself if converted to .mo files). Overall, very confusing. There are a few packages that don't use gettext for translation, I can only assume it is a dislike of (and unfamiliarity with suppressing) gettext noise upstream. gettext is a bit annoying and noisy at the RCS stage upstream - keeping it in check means carrying quite a lot of generated files in RCS which goes against the grain somewhat (and makes it harder to keep the po/ file scripts up to date with gettext itself). If the cupsys system works (AFAICT it does), is a bug warranted merely because gettext isn't being used? We might get to that stage once TDebs become common within Debian itself but I haven't built many packages yet and there may be some logic in non-getext methods. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpx963J29qFT.pgp
Description: PGP signature