Re: OO.o source and new hunspell dicts packaging
[ WTF did you remove the Cc to debian-openoffice? ]
Hi,
Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> Le samedi 26 avril 2008 à 17:03 +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> > > As of 2.4, OO.o upstream provides many updated hunspell dictionaries in
> > > their source. These are much smarter than standard dictionaries we have
> > > in Debian, and are maintained by communities that have cleaned them up
> >
> > For example?
> I'm thinking of the new French dictionary that has been updated to use
> hunspell and which is very nice. But I can see about 25 dicts in the
And what are they built from? The myspell version was built from a
external wordlist and so myspell-fr is built and packages from there
directly.
> source while only 10 "binaries" are produced.
Because the rest is built by the extra packages (de from igerman98, nl
from dutch, etc. Other ones are packages completely external)
> > openoffice.org-dictionaries, you mean.
> Yes. openoffice.org-dictionaries contains a few dicts that are not
> used.
Öet's look at the openoffice.org-dictionaries dirs:
af-ZA -> packaged
cs-CZ -> packaged
de_* -> packaged from igerman98
en_* -> packaged
es_ES -> packaged from espa-nol; README says it's a MySpell dictionary
et_EE -> packaged from ispell-et; README says "OpenOffice.org
spellchecker" and it's from 2004, so probably a MySpell dictionary
fr_* -> ok, that's already the hunspell version...
hu_HU -> packaged from magyarispell; README inside OOo says that it's
the same soure
it_IT -> packaged
lt_LT -> packaged from ispell-lt
ne_NP -> packaged
nl_NL -> packaged from dutch; README in OOos code says "Format: MySpell"
pl_PL -> packaged from ipolish
sk_SK -> packaged from myspell-sk
sl_SI -> packaged from myspell-sl
sv_SE -> packaged from myspell-sv
sw_TZ -> packaged
th_TH -> packaged
zu_ZA -> hmm, indeed missing.
For the varios external myspell-* source packages those maintainers
shoud upload a hunspell version in addition if there is one, not my job
(I far, though, that some of them might have uploaded hunspell dicts as
myspell-*, though...)
So what's about your claim that 15is not used? They are just packaged
externally, where they belong. I find it better building those
dictionaries directly from their source instead of just shipping the
"binaries"...
> > > the process is basically the same for all languages, and we already have
> > > the code needed for some. Would you just give me a few hints about what
> > > should be changed and where to look? Do you think there are any issues
> > > to tackle that I may have missed?
> >
> > Please change the packages from which those packages are built, not
> > openoffice.org-dictionaries itself. For example, hunspell-de-* comes
> > directly out of the source code of it (igerman98)
> I'm only concerned about dictionaries coming from OO.o and not used.
> Others can wait... ;-)
>
> I'm wondering where the dictionaries in openoffice.org-dictionaries come
> from. On the OO.o wiki, many more dicts are listed than in the source
That are the dictionaries which are in OOos source.
> package, and their package is much buigger (58 MB). Are they only bad
> versions?
wiki =! OpenOffice.org source.
That's not the dictionaries which are in OOos source. They come from
wherever. And many of them are legally questionable/violate licenses or
are for whatever else reason not in OOos source.
Regards,
Rene
Reply to: