Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
Hi, Holger Wansing wrote: > Hi, > > Holger Wansing wrote: > > > Another glitch is, that one string > > > ---snip- > > > #. Type: string > > > #. Description > > > #. :sl3: > > > #: ../partman-auto-lvm.templates:11001 > > > #, no-c-format > > > msgid "" > > > "Hint: \"max\" can be used as a shortcut to specify the maximum size, or " > > > "enter a percentage (e.g. \"20%\") to use that percentage of the maximum > > > size." > > > msgstr "" > > > snap-- > > > is not synced to translators material at all. > > > Don't know why ATM. > > > > We will see this evenning, what l10n-sync does now ... > > This is still a problem. > The string mentioned above is still not synced correctly to translators > material. (I have ran l10n-sync without --commit option, otherwise it would > have removed that string from translators material, where I have added it > by hand this morning.) > Something weird is going on ... > Will have to investigate. This was mostly a mis-interpreting of mine. The string mentioned above _IS_ indeed added to the ../po/sublevelX/ structure for translators, but it is in sublevel2, not in 3, even though in partman-auto-lvm it is said to be in sl3. That's because partman-partitioning has the identical string, and there it is said to be in sl2. After this discovery, I ran l10n-sync again with commit rights, and now it looks fine. Cheers Holger -- Created with Sylpheed 3.5.1 under D E B I A N L I N U X 9 " S T R E T C H " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
Hi, Holger Wansing wrote: > > Another glitch is, that one string > > ---snip- > > #. Type: string > > #. Description > > #. :sl3: > > #: ../partman-auto-lvm.templates:11001 > > #, no-c-format > > msgid "" > > "Hint: \"max\" can be used as a shortcut to specify the maximum size, or " > > "enter a percentage (e.g. \"20%\") to use that percentage of the maximum > > size." > > msgstr "" > > snap-- > > is not synced to translators material at all. > > Don't know why ATM. > > We will see this evenning, what l10n-sync does now ... This is still a problem. The string mentioned above is still not synced correctly to translators material. (I have ran l10n-sync without --commit option, otherwise it would have removed that string from translators material, where I have added it by hand this morning.) Something weird is going on ... Will have to investigate. Holger -- Created with Sylpheed 3.5.1 under D E B I A N L I N U X 9 " S T R E T C H " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
On 2018-08-24 14:29, Holger Wansing wrote: Holger Wansing wrote: Philipp Kern wrote: > I have uploaded it now. I suppose we can still fix it after the fact if > it's wrong. I have triggered a l10n-sync run on dillon, to sync the new strings to the translators material. And sadly it did not work as expected: the l10n-sync script apparently does not assume, that translations are inserted into the po files in the partman-auto-lvm tree. Its assumptions are: 1. the english phrases are inserted by the package maintainer into the package tree (in this case partman-auto-lvm tree), and are synced by the l10n-sync script to the po/sublevelx structure in https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/d-i/commits/master which is the material, translators are working on. 2. Then the translated phrases are added (from the translators) to the po/sublevelx structure and are later synced back to the partman-auto-lvm tree. Means we have no translated strings at the moment in GIT :-( I fixed that now manually (hopefully everything is correct). [...] We will see this evenning, what l10n-sync does now ... Thanks! (And sorry for the hassle.) Kind regards Philipp Kern
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
Hi, Holger Wansing wrote: > Philipp Kern wrote: > > I have uploaded it now. I suppose we can still fix it after the fact if > > it's wrong. > > I have triggered a l10n-sync run on dillon, to sync the new strings to > the translators material. > And sadly it did not work as expected: the l10n-sync script apparently does > not assume, that translations are inserted into the po files in the > partman-auto-lvm tree. > > Its assumptions are: > 1. > the english phrases are inserted by the package maintainer into the package > tree (in this case partman-auto-lvm tree), and are synced by the l10n-sync > script to the po/sublevelx structure in > https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/d-i/commits/master > which is the material, translators are working on. > 2. > Then the translated phrases are added (from the translators) to the > po/sublevelx structure and are later synced back to the partman-auto-lvm > tree. > > Means we have no translated strings at the moment in GIT :-( I fixed that now manually (hopefully everything is correct). > Another glitch is, that one string > ---snip- > #. Type: string > #. Description > #. :sl3: > #: ../partman-auto-lvm.templates:11001 > #, no-c-format > msgid "" > "Hint: \"max\" can be used as a shortcut to specify the maximum size, or " > "enter a percentage (e.g. \"20%\") to use that percentage of the maximum > size." > msgstr "" > snap-- > is not synced to translators material at all. > Don't know why ATM. We will see this evenning, what l10n-sync does now ... Holger -- Created with Sylpheed 3.5.1 under D E B I A N L I N U X 9 " S T R E T C H " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
Hi, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2018-08-20 00:44, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > >> https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/partman-auto-lvm/merge_requests/1/diffs?commit_id=ac7bdd5b4e3cbeec24c7ecdd5e96f8fcfa7b9ee1 > >> aims to import a patch from Ubuntu to introduce an additional prompt > >> to the > >> guided LVM setup that asks about how much of the LVM volume group to > >> fill up. > >> I've attached a screenshot of the question. It's asked at high > >> priority right > >> now. > >> > >> Question 1: Is it ok to introduce this prompt? I think it's valuable > >> to ask > >> as resizing after the fact is annoying. And it defaults to the full > >> volume > >> group, which is the current behavior. > > > > While I understand that some people don't like adding extra questions, > > I think this one makes sense. This feature looks like an obviously > > good thing to add, and I've seen quite a few people ask about this > > over the last few years. Code looks good, particularly if it's > > borrowed straight from Colin's code in Ubuntu. > > Ok, thanks! > > >> Question 2: Is sublevel 3 the right one for this question? It does > >> come with > >> Ubuntu's set of translations already. I hope that those are ok to > >> import as > >> well. > > > > Pass, no idea... > > I have uploaded it now. I suppose we can still fix it after the fact if > it's wrong. I have triggered a l10n-sync run on dillon, to sync the new strings to the translators material. And sadly it did not work as expected: the l10n-sync script apparently does not assume, that translations are inserted into the po files in the partman-auto-lvm tree. Its assumptions are: 1. the english phrases are inserted by the package maintainer into the package tree (in this case partman-auto-lvm tree), and are synced by the l10n-sync script to the po/sublevelx structure in https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/d-i/commits/master which is the material, translators are working on. 2. Then the translated phrases are added (from the translators) to the po/sublevelx structure and are later synced back to the partman-auto-lvm tree. Means we have no translated strings at the moment in GIT :-( Another glitch is, that one string ---snip- #. Type: string #. Description #. :sl3: #: ../partman-auto-lvm.templates:11001 #, no-c-format msgid "" "Hint: \"max\" can be used as a shortcut to specify the maximum size, or " "enter a percentage (e.g. \"20%\") to use that percentage of the maximum size." msgstr "" snap-- is not synced to translators material at all. Don't know why ATM. Holger -- Created with Sylpheed 3.5.1 under D E B I A N L I N U X 9 " S T R E T C H " . Registered Linux User #311290 - https://linuxcounter.net/
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
On 2018-08-20 00:44, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/partman-auto-lvm/merge_requests/1/diffs?commit_id=ac7bdd5b4e3cbeec24c7ecdd5e96f8fcfa7b9ee1 aims to import a patch from Ubuntu to introduce an additional prompt to the guided LVM setup that asks about how much of the LVM volume group to fill up. I've attached a screenshot of the question. It's asked at high priority right now. Question 1: Is it ok to introduce this prompt? I think it's valuable to ask as resizing after the fact is annoying. And it defaults to the full volume group, which is the current behavior. While I understand that some people don't like adding extra questions, I think this one makes sense. This feature looks like an obviously good thing to add, and I've seen quite a few people ask about this over the last few years. Code looks good, particularly if it's borrowed straight from Colin's code in Ubuntu. Ok, thanks! Question 2: Is sublevel 3 the right one for this question? It does come with Ubuntu's set of translations already. I hope that those are ok to import as well. Pass, no idea... I have uploaded it now. I suppose we can still fix it after the fact if it's wrong. Kind regards and thanks Philipp Kern
Re: RfC: New LVM volume size restriction prompt
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 02:08:06PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: >Hi, > >https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/partman-auto-lvm/merge_requests/1/diffs?commit_id=ac7bdd5b4e3cbeec24c7ecdd5e96f8fcfa7b9ee1 >aims to import a patch from Ubuntu to introduce an additional prompt to the >guided LVM setup that asks about how much of the LVM volume group to fill up. >I've attached a screenshot of the question. It's asked at high priority right >now. > >Question 1: Is it ok to introduce this prompt? I think it's valuable to ask >as resizing after the fact is annoying. And it defaults to the full volume >group, which is the current behavior. While I understand that some people don't like adding extra questions, I think this one makes sense. This feature looks like an obviously good thing to add, and I've seen quite a few people ask about this over the last few years. Code looks good, particularly if it's borrowed straight from Colin's code in Ubuntu. >Question 2: Is sublevel 3 the right one for this question? It does come with >Ubuntu's set of translations already. I hope that those are ok to import as >well. Pass, no idea... -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com "I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm afraid I'll miss my stop" -- Vivek Das Mohapatra
