On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 01:37:40PM +0100, Michael Piefel wrote: >> I received the attached translations for man-db and for man-db's gnulib >> translations (which would need to be merged with those for gnulib >> proper) from a Debian translator. > > Unfortunately, gnulib and man-db/gnulib differ. Therefore, > http://i18n.debian.net/material/po/unstable/main/m/man-db/gnulib/po/man-db_2.5.5-1_de.po.gz > > now has two fuzzy messages.
Yes, man-db uses a rather old snapshot of gnulib. I'll be updating it to a more current gnulib relatively soon. (The thread starting at http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2009-03/msg00154.html is part of me trying to do this.) I'm not worried about man-db's gnulib translations being up to date just at the moment, but would like to make sure that productive use is made of Kai's work. > My attached de.po does not, but it should be more or less identical to > what Kai already had sent you. Yeah, I'm not going to update man-db's gnulib translations directly, since gnulib-tool would just overwrite those by rsync next time I run it. Plus I'm not wild about forking bits of gnulib. :-) > The proper way to go would be to update the upstream gnulib.pot, which > has not happened for one and a half years. That, however, is out of my > reach. Indeed, http://translationproject.org/POT-files/gnulib-1.1.pot is looking a bit stale. Could somebody on bug-gnulib update the POT file held by the TP, please? Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org]
