Re: Status of dict-freedict-*-* packages
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004, Roland Rosenfeld wrote:
> Please keep in mind, that txt2pho
> (http://www.ikp.uni-bonn.de/dt/forsch/phonetik/hadifix/HADIFIXforMBROLA.html)
> isn't DFSG free. You're allowed to copy it for free, but you only get
> sources for this. So the result of txt2pho may be free, but it's not
> possible to create this file from trans-de-en with only DFSG free
> tools :-(
I noticed this in my further research yesterday ...
> > Regarding to the ding database: It is inside Debian in the
> > trans-de-en package (Maintainer in CC). So my suggestion is: Use
> > the trans-de-en package together with throughtxt2pho to build the
> > dictd dictionary from *real* source.
>
> I'd like this idea except the above mentioned problem, that txt2pho
> isn't DFSG free.
You are right here.
> > This would enable us to orphan the other dictd dictionary which is
> > based on the same source (Frank Richter's "ding" database) - the
> > dict-de-en package. This package has some bugs assigned which also
> > have their trouble because of having no real source.
>
> One way would be using dictunformat to "decompile" the dictionary and
> after this use dictfmt and dictzip to compile it again. But this
> doesn't solve the problem, that we work on a preprocessed source,
> which doesn't allow to merge upstream changes into the package.
I tried this also yesterday, but dictunformat fails (for a reason
I do not know as a dict-novice).
> Sounds like the correct solution to me (especially with the
> background, that installing dict-de-en causes a segmentation fault in
> dictd).
The reason is the worng encoding. I prepared patches for ding
yesterday which builds utf-8 dictd database - but it also fails for
a reason I do not know. But I contacted the dictd maintainer for
help. (Feel free to ask me for the preliminary - non working -
stuff.)
> The disadvantage of this way is that it will remove the txt2pho
> created phonetics from the dictionary.
Well at least it would enable easier maintainance of dict-de-en
which is a slightly better situation of the current one.
Moreover I asked the freedict author how to get access to the
CVS source of the freedict data. This would mean that we would
not be able to unify the dictionary, but have real sources for
both at least. People then might choose between the phonetics
or non-phonetics version.
> Me too, except the txt2pho part...
> Except this we should think about the encoding of the dictionary. On
> my iso-8859-1 system, wordinspect (a dict client) doesn't find any of
> the utf-8 encoded non-ascii words from dict-freedict-deu-eng, while I
> read in bug #217210 that the iso-8859-1 encoding of dict-de-en is a
> problem of utf-8 users...
This is a subjet I try to sort out with the dictd maintainer who promissed
help in this issue. If he does not find time you will hear about the
issue on debian-devel. ;-)
Kind regards
Andreas.
Reply to: