On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 03:39:09PM +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > I'm resolving this bug because I'm also including my response to the > problems in pgp.c, if you think that my answers are not clear or do not > make sense please feel free to reopen this bug.
> # pgp.c: line 1592 - not (f)ormat?
> AND
> # pgp.c: line 1599 - why is f in the choices?
>
> By looking at the source code it seems to me that a similar string is
> used in both versions of the if/else block with the only difference that
> the second string does not contain any switch to change from PGP/MIME to
> inline and viceversa, the reason of (f) seems to be (forget) and not
> (format), just to be a placeholder in the choice() menu of the code.
I probably hit the limit of my C knowledge here, but I looked at mutt
how it works and indeed the format does not appear. So for the
translation I simply keep "f" as dummy in the translation of the
answer string.
> For the following line:
> # pgp.c: line 1606 - where is the string in this file???
>
> %s is not needed here, it seems just a copy/paste error which is not
> seen in some other .po, my suggestion is to remove %s in the translation
> (especially because is not used in that particular switch of the code).
> Obviously you shouldn't touch %s in pgp.c:1592 because it is used there.
I'm not sure I entierly grasp this, probably because I cannot relate
line numbers in de.po with line numbers in pgp.c where there seems to
be some offset.
I *think* though I got the idea and updated the translation
accordingly, you'll receive it in the other bug (the difference is
only two fuzzy strings which are now unfuzzy).
Greetings
Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann [email protected]
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
