On 2 Apr 2002, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Lars> I completely disagree with this since the lyx.pot will be very
> Lars> out of sync with the reality.
What?! What are you on about? Why would lyx.pot be any more out of
sync with reality than it already is?
In my tree I see:
[rae@galah ~...LyX/lyx-devel]> ll po/lyx.pot po/POTFILES.in
8 -rw-r----- 1 rae rae 6236 Apr 2 14:31 po/POTFILES.in
168 -rw-r--r-- 1 rae rae 167564 Jul 4 2001 po/lyx.pot
In the log entries I see:
revision 1.6
date: 1999/12/21 06:09:27; author: larsbj; state: dead; lines: +0 -0
remvoe lyx.pot from cvs and add lyx.pot to cvs ignore
You force a update of po/lyx.pot when you build a dist. Why oh, why
would removing po/POTFILES.in from CVS but making sure it is always
present be any different to what happens now?
If my patch were applied (and po/POTFILES.in were removed from CVS)
and someone did a fresh checkout and did:
./autogen.sh
./configure
make dist
then they'd get a freshly regenerated po/POTFILES.in _and_ a freshly
updated po/lyx.pot and so on.
All this patch does is make sure you have a po/POTFILES.in in your
tree.
> Lars> Either we keep it as is, or make the POTFILES.in generation
> Lars> manual i.e. we add files to it manually.
>
> Either way, we have to make sure generation will work when starting
> from a fresh dist.
This is both true now and after the patch is applied -- except that
after the patch is applied you don't need to have a pre-existing
po/POTFILES.in in your tree to be able to successfully run make!
Arrrggghhh!
We generate po/POTFILES.in now. Why do need to switch to doing it all
manually?
The only good arguement I've heard so far is JMarc's about the
rewritten 0.11 probably doing things differently -- hopefully they'll
have incorporated something similar into 0.11 so my patch isn't
necessary.
Allan. (ARRae)
