[Teemu Likonen]
I think the question of default spell-checker is more practical than
technical; it has to be considered from supported languages' point
of view.
I agree, but I believe all are fairly equivalent there. At least I
know that for the simple languages like Norwegian Bokmål and
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 08:08:42AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
If we were to keep a spell checker as part of the default
installation, I would suggest using hunspell as it is most advanced
and I am told it support the most languages at the moment. The next
step would be to change all
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 02:54:34AM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
Hi all!
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 12:17:52 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Manoj Srivastava]
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
None of the spell checkers are drop in replacements for the others.
Each
Hi all!
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 12:17:52 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Manoj Srivastava]
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
None of the spell checkers are drop in replacements for the others.
Each program need to have support for ispell, aspell, myspell and/or
hunspell.
Hi all (again)!
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 02:54:34 +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 12:17:52 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Manoj Srivastava]
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
None of the spell checkers are drop in replacements for the others.
Each program
[Luca Capello]
It seems that I cannot find a comparison of the differences spell
checkers. Please, could you enlighten me on why hunspell should be
a better default one?
I can only refer to the knowledge I have gotten from those I know that
work on spell checkers. The features of spell
(I just subscribed to this list and tried to construct the References
field manually. I Hope it won't broke threads.)
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Luca Capello]
It seems that I cannot find a comparison of the differences spell
checkers. Please, could you enlighten me on why hunspell should
[Manoj Srivastava]
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
None of the spell checkers are drop in replacements for the others.
Each program need to have support for ispell, aspell, myspell and/or
hunspell. This is why I want us to try to get as many packages as
possible to
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 12:17:52 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
[Manoj Srivastava]
Are these packages a drop in replacement for ispell?
None of the spell checkers are drop in replacements for the others.
Each program need to have support for ispell, aspell, myspell and/or
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 23:49:05 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
[Russ Allbery]
See previous thread about old Unix users and what we expect. :)
Well, some old unix users might expect it, but I've been using Unix
and friends since I started with HP-UX 9 in 1992, and I do not
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:08:42 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
[Anthony Towns]
Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway: It also includes, but
afaics, probably doesn't need to (anymore):
ispell, dictionaries-common, iamerican, ibritish, wamerican
[Agustin Martin]
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:06:16 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
[Brian M. Carlson]
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least, every Unix system I have
* Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071222 20:22]:
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least, every Unix system I have used provides
one.
OK. Which programs? I
On Sun, Dec 23, 2007 at 02:05:41PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071222 20:22]:
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least,
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 08:08:42AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Anthony Towns]
Kind of reviving an old thread, but anyway:
It also includes, but afaics, probably doesn't need to (anymore):
ispell, dictionaries-common, iamerican, ibritish, wamerican
[Agustin Martin]
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 08:08:42AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Because of this, I believe it would be a good idea to drop ispell from
the list of standard packages, and the related packages too (i*, w*).
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs.
[Brian M. Carlson]
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least, every Unix system I have used provides
one.
OK. Which programs? I was only aware of ispell.
Happy hacking,
On la, 2007-12-22 at 20:06 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Brian M. Carlson]
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least, every Unix system I have used provides
one.
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Brian M. Carlson]
Note that the w* packages provide word lists, which are important to
many programs. One could argue that a standard Unix system should
have a word list; at least, every Unix system I have used provides
one.
OK. Which
[Russ Allbery]
See previous thread about old Unix users and what we expect. :)
Well, some old unix users might expect it, but I've been using Unix
and friends since I started with HP-UX 9 in 1992, and I do not expect
word lists to be installed by default. :)
Lets move to the most advanced
20 matches
Mail list logo
