On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 12:53:03 +0200 Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le samedi 14 juillet 2007 à 08:28 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit : > > > From what I see in the dozens of .desktop files I have on my own > > > system, I see "Field[code]" fields for translations of "Field". > > > > > > This is similar to what we had, in the past, for debconf > > > templates and we all known this doesn't scale and doesn't handle > > > changes to English strings very well. > > > > The strings used to generate translated .desktop entries can > > (should) come from the upstream po/ directory via gettext - it can > > be handled directly using gettext and make. > > Actually they are using intltool, just like we do for debconf > templates. Yes, just ignore my initial post - I broke my own rule about sending in haste. > > All my upstream projects include all > > translatable strings for the .desktop file in the .gmo (and > > therefore the installed .mo) yet these also exist in the .desktop > > file that is eventually installed. > > Side note: you don't need to install such .mo files, unless they also > contain translations accessed from the code. Yes, they do. The .desktop strings are included to that there is only one POT file to send to translators. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpZ5dzSURQTI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
