Bruno Haible wrote on Sat, 15 Jul 2017 21:24 +0200:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > So: should po file generation allow the caller to control the timestamp
> > that would be embedded?
>
> No, that would be a regression for the translators.
>
No, it would not. The proposed change is to set the
Santiago Vila wrote:
> But so far, the non-reproducible Debian packages using gettext I've
> seen fail to be reproducible because maintainers insist on
> regenerating a .pot file at build time and performing msgmerge on all
> the .po files with the newly generated .pot file "just in case", or
>
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > it's plain text, and it's a small diff.
>
> This doesn't scale. (For example, in my use-case, I'm dealing with a
> 5000-line unified diff full of one-line changes in date strings and C
> comments and any number of other things. My goal is to get the number of
> lines
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 06:04:58PM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> So: should po file generation allow the caller to control the timestamp
> that would be embedded?
Maybe, or maybe not.
But so far, the non-reproducible Debian packages using gettext I've
seen fail to be reproducible because
Bruno Haible wrote on Sat, 15 Jul 2017 19:40 +0200:
> But SO WHAT? It does not get installed on the end user's system.
I am not disputing that .mo files, which are installed on user systems,
should be reproducible.
I am asserting that there is another workflow which would be simpler if
.po file
Hello,
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Putting the fix into msgfmt is an option when the .mo file needs to be
> reproducible
Yes, .mo files are binary files, installed on the end users' systems. Therefore
we've made .mo files reproducible [1].
> but I'm facing an issue where I'd like the .pot file
>
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 01:57:48PM +0100, Bruno Haible wrote:
> In my opinion (as former Gettext maintainer) the fix ought to go into
> msgfmt, not xgettext.
>
> The gettext.diff.txt patch from
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=792687
> is therefore the wrong approach, IMO.
A bug has been opened in the Gettext bug tracker about this issue:
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?49654
In my opinion (as former Gettext maintainer) the fix ought to go into
msgfmt, not xgettext.
The gettext.diff.txt patch from
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=792687
is
On 08/31/2015 09:32 PM, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Would be possible to drop the forked gettext and try to fix this in
> the affected packages?
Hi Santiago, I saw that you have been working on the packages affected
by the POT creation date timestamps in gettext mo files today so maybe
you know this
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:28:28PM +0200, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> Santiago Vila:
> > Excluding .pot files from what is considered to be the "source" might
> > be part of the problem.
>
> See tor-monitor upstream's reaction, for example:
>
On 09/01/2015 12:36 AM, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 12:01:45AM +0200, Chris Lamb wrote:
>>> As a proof of concept, I've fixed "pppconfig" the way I think this
>>> kind of bugs should be fixed: By not running "po/update.sh" each and
>>> every time.
>>
>>
Santiago Vila:
> Excluding .pot files from what is considered to be the "source" might
> be part of the problem.
See tor-monitor upstream's reaction, for example:
https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-privacy-maintainers/Week-of-Mon-20150824/15.html
Quoting Alan from there:
> I
> As a proof of concept, I've fixed "pppconfig" the way I think this
> kind of bugs should be fixed: By not running "po/update.sh" each and
> every time.
https://gist.github.com/be5b243cfcaaa27819f0 is the diff for anyone
interested
> Would be possible to drop the forked gettext and try to fix
Source: gettext
Version: 0.19.4-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: toolchain timestamps
X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
Hi,
While working on the reproducible builds effort [1], we have noticed
that the xgettext
14 matches
Mail list logo
