Hi, From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Denis Barbier) Subject: Re: I18N (Multibyte Enablation) of debconf Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 21:52:45 +0200
> IMHO you should first focus on providing working solutions for each > individual program, and see later how to provide reusable code. Ok. Line-folding is small but complex (i.e., easily containing bugs) processing, so I would like to write one code and reuse it for both. I will also start a general project to develop a library for multilingual line-folding at the same time: http://libtextwrap.sourceforge.net/ > The main reason is that this would allow Japanese translators to > work on these programs, maybe they are not willing to do so now. > There are surely other problems which are hidden now, and the sooner > these programs are known to work with your locales, the better. If possible, I would like to translate task names and descriptions into Japanese. Since tasksel is one of basic packages, I imagine someone will want to translate even if I won't. BTW, I have noticed that tasksel has to use slang1-utf8 instead of slang1 to support Japanese in EUC-JP encoding (I have not tested UTF-8). (Changing Build-Depends: line in debian/control file seems to be enough on this point.) (Offtopic) Is slang1a-utf8 an extension of slang1 not only for UTF-8 but also for other multibyte encodings? If it were true, the name and Description: of the package would not be appropriate. > About cdebconf, a fake C.UTF-8 locale is used, so all strings are UTF-8 > encoded. Language selection is done via the LANGUAGE environment > variable. > With tasksel, LC_CTYPE encoding is used. I see. In cdebconf case, usage of C.UTF-8 locale will mean that LC_CTYPE encoding is UTF-8. Thus, adoption of LC_CTYPE for my line-folder can support both cases. --- Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/
