Translation of coreutils

Hi, I noticed that some parts of coreutils are not translated to spanish, and that some parts are translated but the program still shows the english message. I already sent a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], which are the mails that appear in es.po, but I have no answer. For example

Doubt about expr

I don't know if it is a standard of expr, but I think that is not intuitive to write a plus symbol before the string substr if I want to get the length of it. I know that is in the help, but I think that this shouldn't be necessary. I haven't seen the source code of the parsing so much, because I

Re: ls --sort=none -r

At 02:49 PM -0700 2006-09-12, Paul Eggert wrote: >Dave Yost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The -r should reverse the (unsorted) order. > >But POSIX+XSI requires that -r must be turned off >if unsorted order is specified (the -f option). See >

Re: The test command

I'm CC'ing this to bug-coreutils with the full expectation that it'll bounce because I'm not subscribed. On Sep 12, 11:20am, Dave Yost wrote: } } I propose this addition to the age-old test command: Unlikely. It breaks backwards compatibility. "test" is one of those things that's now SO old, th

Feature request: counting fields/chars from the right.

Apologies if this is the wrong address, or the wrong protocal for a feature request. I need to use cut, but have variable numbers of fields/chars and often need to count from the right hand side of a line. Unfortunately the LIST sytax precludes cut being modified to accept -1 as the 1st column o

who.c change to avoid GCC 4.1.1 warning

I got this warning on my Debian stable x86 host with GCC 4.1.1: who.c: In function 'print_user': who.c:417: warning: value computed is not used and so installed the following: 2006-09-12 Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * src/who.c (print_user): Rewrite to avoid warning from

Re: The test command

Dave Yost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I propose this addition to the age-old test command: > > --verbose >If the test does not succeed, print the reason why to stderr Something like that might be useful, but it shouldn't be called "test". Many scripts depend on "test" not having any

Re: ls --sort=none -r

Dave Yost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The -r should reverse the (unsorted) order. But POSIX+XSI requires that -r must be turned off if unsorted order is specified (the -f option). See . Surely there's not much call for reversing

The test command

I propose this addition to the age-old test command: --verbose If the test does not succeed, print the reason why to stderr The usefulness of this is shown in this example: if ! test --verbose -e "$file" ; then exit $? fi Dave ___

ls --sort=none -r

The -r should reverse the (unsorted) order. And the man page should be changed to say: -r, --reverse reverse the order (whether or not sorted) Dave ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo

Re: [patch] cifs and 'df -l'

Tim Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here is a patch that adds a check for 'cifs' filesystem types, so they > can be omitted from 'df -l' output. Thanks. That bug was also reported on July 19 by Toralf Förster in , and Mike Frysinger's patch

[patch] cifs and 'df -l'

Hi, Here is a patch that adds a check for 'cifs' filesystem types, so they can be omitted from 'df -l' output. Tim. */ --- coreutils-5.97/lib/mountlist.c.df-cifs 2006-09-12 11:19:18.0 +0100 +++ coreutils-5.97/lib/mountlist.c 2006-09-12 11:20:28.0 +0100 @@ -152,12 +152,13 @@ #i

Re: Problem with definition of a field in 'uniq'

Paul E Condon wrote: > I report a feature of uniq which seems IMHO to be a bug: > I am using test files containing the following lines: > > tsttmp1: > 2/dl1/f04 lnk2/f04 Europe but where? > 2/dl1/f04alnk2/f04 Europe but where? > > tsttmp2: > 2/dl1

Re: Problem with definition of a field in 'uniq'

Paul E Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I use the commands: > $ uniq -f 1 -W 1 -D tsttmp1 coreutils uniq doesn't have a -W option, so you must be using some modified version. You might try writing to whoever maintains the downstream version. ___