Kaixo!
Recently I learned that it is possible to create an aspell language
file from an ispell one.
So, I wonder if it isn't now time to do the switch (I had asked to keep ispell
when aspell has been introduced in the distro as there were (and still are)
several languages for which there are ispell files but not aspell ones).
aspell and ispell have different interfaces and command line parameters
however.
So, I wondered, if we provided a shell script called "ispell" to do
the needed compatibvility support, removed the ispell language modules
that have an aspell one, and coverted to aspell the ones existing
only in ispell; would that be ok ?
If you use ispell I would like to hear from you about this.
If there is no objections, I would start the switch.
>From a packager/mantainer point of vue, the package aspell will include
a compatibility script "ispell", and the package "ispell" will be moved
to contrib (or at least put with a very low priority in DrakX), and have
the binary "ispell" renamed (to "ispell.original" or something like that);
and it main purpose would be to allow the conversion of ispell packages
to aspell (as the process involves use of ispell to expand to a raw wordlist).
So, for packages having only ispell equivalent the build process would be:
- create ispell hash
- expand ispell hash to wordlist
- convert wordlist to aspell file
- package an rpm with the aspell files
Thanks
--
Ki �a vos v�ye b�n,
Pablo Saratxaga
Nen� po��d m�jov� ve�er.
-- holandsk� p��slov�
