RL wrote: > What is the deal with > https://www.debian.org/international/l10n/po-debconf/en - are these > packages with invalid .po or is the page just not coping with English > being the 'default' (but then why are some listed as "complete")?
It looks as if the handful of packages listed there as having "en.po" files have various fairly trivial bugs: norwegian - no intelligible relationship between msgid and msgstr The en.po file is datestamped 2007, so clearly a relic of some sort solaar - msgstr strings diverge arbitrarily from msgids "Automatically generated" relics from before the review in https://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2014/09/msg00005.html kbd-chooser - msgstr strings pointlessly duplicate msgids The listed translator died tragically back in 2010... Could this be some sort of udeb oddity? tzdata - msgstr versions are more clearly expressed versions Might be deliberate, but if so it ought to be documented. durep - pointless duplication of wobbly English With the translator listed as "dummy"... This may imply that the best way forward would be to make sure that lintian checks for en.po files. -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
