Hello Guillem, thanks for your extensive reply. Since I keep the German translation up to date, schedules are no problem. I just point out that according to the freeze policy translation updates during the freeze need to be accompanied by other (approved) fixes. However, I guess this is not a problem for dpkg.
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:19:34AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 21:13:00 +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> > Here is the detailed lists:
> > #: dpkg.1:214
> > package installed paths - what is this? Do you mean "paths installed
> > by packges"? This sentence is hard to parse all together.
>
> > is the binary → are the binary (I'm not sure on this one)
>
> Well my thinking here was, “The origin (…) is (…)”, so that both match
> in number. But I had my doubts too.
Ok, then leave it as is (I'm neither a native speaker).
> > The reference for "which gets" is unclear. Are you refering to the
> > "information" (which I think) or to "the packages"? Maybe split into
> > to sentences:
> > The origin ... themselves. The information gets collected ...
>
> I guess part of problem why I end up creating convoluted sentences is
> because I don't like very much repeating myself. But I'm not sure how
> to reconcile those two at times.
>
> Ok, how about this rewording:
>
> ,---
> Verifies the integrity of \fIpackage-name\fP or all packages if omitted,
> by comparing information from the files installed by a package with the
> files metadata information stored in the \fBdpkg\fP database. The origin
> of the files metadata information in the database is the binary packages
> themselves. That metadata gets collected at package unpack time during
> the installation process.
> `---
I like this much better.
> > dpkg-maintscript-helper.1:242
> > The second sentence is unclear:
> > ... by the script as set by dpkg have been setup ...
> > Do you mean:
> > ... for the script ... ?
> > (Also isn't it setup → set up?)
>
> Hmm, here I meant that the environment variables are required by the
> script, in the way dpkg sets them up. How about:
>
> ,---
> … The
> \fBsupports\fP command will check if the environment variables as set
> by dpkg and required by the script are present, and will consider it a
> failure in case the environment is not sufficient.
> `---
I like this much better.
> > dpkg-query.1:130
> > I've trouble parsing the second sentence. Substituting
> > Although → Since would make more sense to me.
>
> Ok, how about this:
>
> ,---
> … Although, as long as there is still at least
> one case where this command is needed (i.e. when having to remove a
> damaging postrm maintainer script), and while there is no good solution
> for that, this command will not get removed.
> `---
Yes, now "Although" makes sense.
> > Btw. is it ok if I fix obvious (spelling) errors myself in the future
> > or do you want them to be reviewed here?
>
> As long as they are really obvious, like the above 'supported', and
> that several of them from a review session are batched into a single
> commit, I'm ok with that. Otherwise, I'd rather handle them myself,
> if you don't mind.
Not at all, I just wanted to establish the work flow.
Greetings
Helge
--
Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de
Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
