On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 05:31:19AM +0300, Brian Nelson wrote: > Are there any good reasons to not do require dicts to be autobuild, > aside from having to do a transition?
Not many, I think that even for today's low end computers aspell is behaving quite efficiently building hashes. I tried in a PII-350 and worked very reasonably. I do not expect people using aspell having less powerful computers. The only remaining drawback is that requires more disk space, but if computer is running with such space limitations, is problematic anyway, not only because aspell autobuilt dicts take more space (gzipped sources + hash instead of only hash). This will be less important once affix compression is implemented in all dicts. Still need to check this with one of the huge dicts, I think currently only aspell-gl-minimos uses this compression and works well. I have done some experiments with aspell-ca and aspell-nl and also seem to work well, but not yet tested in the slow computer. > > > But in that case I think is better if things are > > put in a non-versioned directory, so the dict location does not change > > in case of a non binary-compatible aspell upgrade, just hashes are > > autorebuilt. That could be something like > > > > /usr/lib/aspell-auto > > I'll buy that. I could change aspell to use /usr/lib/aspell-auto, and > the only thing that would break would be current dictionaries, right? > If a dictionary were not autobuilt but installed stuff into > /usr/lib/aspell-auto directly from the .deb, would aspell-autobuildhash > be able to cope? That is not an aspell-autobuildhash problem, but an aspell one, and it deals with this. Hashes built with aspell-autobuildhash will not be created there, but in /var/lib/aspell, with /usr/lib/aspell/$hash.rws -> /var/lib/aspell/$hash.rws symlinks. Is the same for aspell to find a symlink or the real hash. Everything else would be installed in /usr/lib/aspell. aspell-autobuildhash does not fiddle into that directory, but relies on /usr/share/aspell/$hash.mwl.gz and /var/lib/aspell/$hash.compat. > Of course, if both auto and non-auto dicts could share the > /usr/lib/aspell-auto, we might as well go back to just calling it > /usr/lib/aspell... Agreed, > > > If new hashes are sought for in a versioned dir, we would need to move the > > dicts links when a new binary incompatible aspell is uploaded, making things > > unnecesarily complicated. > > Yeah. The only real benefit from having a version in the directory name > is to support concurrent installs of incompatible aspells, which of > course we don't need... And that would require duplication of dicts for both versions, with some apps linked against one aspell and other against the other, and aspell-bin linked to only one. I think this would be a big mess with a poor benefit. Cheers, -- Agustin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
