Re: UTF-8 in GNOME2 po files

El lun, 28-01-2002 a las 01:10, Christian Rose escribió:
> sön 2002-01-27 klockan 23.45 skrev Jody Goldberg:
> > It sounds as if people are saying that there exist versions of
> > gettext that can not map non-utf8 po file -> utf8 on the fly.
> Yeah, this is the situation, if I understand Carlos correctly. There are
> versions of gettext and libc on various platforms that cannot handle
> UTF-8 conversion on the fly, and where the po files thus have to be in
> UTF-8 for translations to work in GNOME2.

Yes. this is the main problem.

> > If this is true there we can either require better gettext routines or
> > ensure that the po files are in utf8.  The latter seems like a
> > better solution.
> I think a lot of people are leaning towards requiring po files in UTF-8
> for GNOME2. I know Carlos is. :-)


> The portability argument is quite convincing, and the status of support
> for UTF-8 editing (at least for latin scripts) in tools isn't as bad as
> I previously thought, so personally I've changed my mind. All Swedish
> translations for GNOME2 will be in UTF-8.


> An decision whether there should be a requirement for UTF-8 in all
> GNOME2 translations isn't really up to me, though. But in any case there
> needs to be a decision soon.

The main problem is with all systems with glibc < 2.2 will not work with
GNOME 2.0 so Will us require that ALL world update its distro to glibc
>= 2.2? Why? I know some people that likes RedHat 6.2 much more that
RedHat 7.x (for example) or think that the latest Debian release is
based on glibc < 2.2...

I think that we can only use UTF-8 as .po encoding to solve this

> Christian


> _______________________________________________
> gnome-hackers mailing list
Carlos Perelló Marín
Valencia - Spain

This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]