Le 7 février 2012 19:55, Helge Kreutzmann a écrit : > Hello David, > On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:15:37PM -0400, David Prévot wrote: >> Please, no need to CC me or the po4a-devel list when replying to the bug >> report. > > Ok. The CC to the list should not have worked as discussed anyway. > >> Le 01/01/2012 12:24, Helge Kreutzmann a écrit : >> > -So, when the same paragraph appears twice in the original but are not >> > +So, when the same paragraph appears twice in the original but both are not >> > translated in the exact same way each time, you will get the feeling that >> > a >> > paragraph of the original disappeared. Just kill the new translation. If >> > you >> > prefer to kill the first translation instead when it was actually better, >> > -remove the second one from where it is and put it in place of the first >> > one. >> > +remove the second one from where it is and put the first one in place of >> > the second one. >> >> The sense is not the same (it's even the contrary), and I don't think >> your proposal is accurate. > > Well, then I don't understand the sentence. I just wanted to clarify > the "it". So if I understand you correctly, it should read. > remove the second one from where it is and put the second one in the > place of the first one
Hallo Helge, Consider this example: foo.en.txt contains foo bar foo and foo.fr.txt contains tata titi toto There can be only one msgid "foo" in the gettextized PO file, but two different msgstr are provided. The paragraph tries to explain that you can replace (in foo.fr.txt) toto by tata if you want to keep the first translaton, or tata by toto if you prefer the second. This paragraph is easier to understand if you read it within its full context - Sometimes, you get the strong feeling that po4a ate some parts of the text, either the original or the translation. gettextization.failed.po indicates that both of them where gently matching, and then the gettextization fails because it tried to match one paragraph with the one after (or before) the right one, as if the right one disappeared. Curse po4a as I did when it first happened to me. Generously. This unfortunate situation happens when the same paragraph is repeated over the document. In that case, no new entry is created in the PO file, but a new reference is added to the existing one instead. So, when the same paragraph appears twice in the original but are not translated in the exact same way each time, you will get the feeling that a paragraph of the original disappeared. Just kill the new translation. If you prefer to kill the first translation instead when it was actually better, remove the second one from where it is and put it in place of the first one. The author explains that one has to edit files (original and translation) until msgid and msgstr match. The problem is that this description makes sense only when you face this problem for real, otherwise it looks way too abstract. Moreover in such a case, po4a-gettextize will not complain and generate something like: #. type: Plain text #: foo.en.txt:2 foo.en.txt:5 #, fuzzy msgid "foo" msgstr "" "#-#-#-#-# foo.fr.txt:2 #-#-#-#-#\n" "tata\n" "#-#-#-#-# foo.fr.txt:5 #-#-#-#-#\n" "toto" Thus I wonder whether this piece of advice is still accurate, maybe it would be better to drop it entirely. Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
