I realized that the below response was sent to #1017646, but not #1086609, so I am sending it again here for anyone who is following the conversation.
I really hope that we can ship a compliant version of scown in trixie. Currently, every hunspell package properly ships .bdic dictionaries except for scowl and the following: hunspell-ar: #1020481 hunspell-bo: #1020479 hunspell-br: #1020478 medicalterms: #1020475 hunspell-dz: #1020474 hunspell-ml: #1020467 dutch: #1020466 All of these do not appear to have active maintainers. Perhaps I might go through the package salvaging process to ship .bdic dictionaries in these packages (although I always think it is better if someone who speaks the language handles a language package). Of all of the packages that do not yet properly handle .bidc dictionaries, scowl has by far the greatest popcon installations. On Friday, November 1, 2024 11:05:57 PM MST Don Armstrong wrote: > On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Soren Stoutner wrote:\n > > > Control: -1 reopen > > > > As explained in the previous email, the consensus for how .bidc > > dictionaries should be configured has changed since the original patch > > was prepared. Attached is a patch that brings scowl into conformity. > > Where is this documented in the Debian dictionary policy? It is documented in the dictionaries-common package. Specifically, you can see the changes that were added to this package in the following two MRs: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dictionaries-common/-/merge_requests/5 https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dictionaries-common/-/merge_requests/6 The resulting policy can be read here: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dictionaries-common/-/blob/master/policy/dsdt-policy.xml.in?ref_type=heads Or: /usr/share/doc/dictionaries-common-dev/dsdt-policy.html > The attached patch makes some changes which don't match the qtengine > documentation (removing existing symlinks), and creating YA directory > for bdic files doesn't seem to provide any advantage. [What code looks > for them in that directory?] A couple of the relevant paragraphs from the policy: "Compiled .bdic files should be installed in /usr/share/hunspell-bdic. They should be shipped in the same binary package as the corresponding .dic and .aff files.” "The Qt packages will install the following system-wide environment variable in /etc/environment.d/ so that programs that use Qt WebEngine will be able to find the .bdic dictionaries: QTWEBENGINE_DICTIONARIES_PATH=/usr/share/hunspell-bdic/” This environment variable eliminates the needs for the symlinks that were originally envisioned and end up being a more elegant solution. (And, actually, your shipping of those symlinks now befuddles the system a little bit, because those symlinks and this environment variable fight against each other.) If you have any further questions please feel free to ask. If you would like to read over the entire discussion that led to this policy consensus, you can do so at: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1020387 -- Soren Stoutner [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
