bug-inetutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-inetutils] syntax-checks


From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: [bug-inetutils] syntax-checks
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:21:12 -0400

   I have fixed so that gnulib's 'make syntax-check' works again, and by
   running it I noticed these three complaints:

Thanks!

   1) We use HAVE_CONFIG_H a lot:

   maint.mk: found use of HAVE_CONFIG_H; remove
   make: *** [sc_prohibit_have_config_h] Fel 1

   Any objections to dropping all HAVE_CONFIG_H uses in InetUtils?
   GNU projects appears to be moving away from it, and there is no
   point for any project using gnulib (like InetUtils) to use
   HAVE_CONFIG_H since gnulib code already assumes there is a
   config.h.

That is fine.

   2) Internationalization issues:

   ftp/main.c
   ftpd/ftpd.c
   ifconfig/ifconfig.c
   libinetutils/argcv.c
   ping/ping.c
   ping/ping6.c
   src/hostname.c
   src/inetd.c
   src/logger.c
   src/rcp.c
   src/rexec.c
   src/rexecd.c
   src/rlogin.c
   src/rlogind.c
   src/rsh.c
   src/rshd.c
   src/syslogd.c
   src/tftp.c
   src/tftpd.c
   src/traceroute.c
   src/uucpd.c
   talk/talk.c
   talkd/talkd.c
   telnet/main.c
   telnetd/telnetd.c
   tests/addrpeek.c
   tests/localhost.c
   maint.mk: the above files do not call bindtextdomain

   With the exception of the programs in tests/, it looks like this
   indicate a real bug: that there aren't any translations.  InetUtils
   should be internationalized.  We don't even have any po/ directory!
   I'm assuming this is an oversight?

   Marking strings has to be done manually and carefully to make sure
   we translate useful strings.  It would quite an effort to resolve
   this in one go, however we can start on this and add strings as we
   move along.

   Any objections to creating a gettext domain for InetUtils and start
   marking strings for translation?

The major problem is that many of the strings are hard to translate (I
think I once removed a bunch of _() calls to clean things up).  I
would prefer, for now, to just add this check to the list of
syntax-checks to be ignored.  Atleast, until we release.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]