https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89915
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Roland Illig from comment #2) > But then I remembered that "internal compiler errors" have also made their > way into gcc.pot. I don't see any benefit in translating internal errors, > therefore I have requested to remove these internal errors from the > translation; see bug 80055. Nothing has happened on this topic in the last 2 > years. > > Therefore I guess this "internal" means the same as in "internal compiler > error", and that everything internal should still be translated. No. The fact a bug hasn't been fixed yet doesn't mean it's not a bug. > There's a decision to make: either the internal stuff is really considered > internal, in which case no translation is necessary and the text quality > doesn't matter as well. Or, the word "internal" as used by the GCC project > actually means "publicly visible" and therefore needs high-quality text. I think internal means internal.
