Re: an oddity (was: Re: kexec-tools template update)
RL wrote:
> What is the deal with
> https://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po-debconf/en - are these
> packages with invalid .po or is the page just not coping with English
> being the 'default' (but then why are some listed as "complete")?
It looks as if the handful of packages listed there as having "en.po"
files have various fairly trivial bugs:
norwegian - no intelligible relationship between msgid and msgstr
The en.po file is datestamped 2007, so clearly a relic of some sort
solaar - msgstr strings diverge arbitrarily from msgids
"Automatically generated" relics from before the review in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2014/09/msg00005.html
kbd-chooser - msgstr strings pointlessly duplicate msgids
The listed translator died tragically back in 2010...
Could this be some sort of udeb oddity?
tzdata - msgstr versions are more clearly expressed versions
Might be deliberate, but if so it ought to be documented.
durep - pointless duplication of wobbly English
With the translator listed as "dummy"...
This may imply that the best way forward would be to make sure that
lintian checks for en.po files.
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Reply to: