El lun, 18 ene 2021 a las 13:54, Kurt Roeckx (<k...@roeckx.be>) escribió: > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:22:48PM +0100, Agustin Martin wrote: > > El dom, 17 ene 2021 a las 16:06, Kurt Roeckx (<k...@roeckx.be>) escribió: > > > > > > Package: dictionaries-common-dev > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Vim has support for spellchecking using it's own spell check > > > files. It can be generated based on hunspell .aff/.dic files, or > > > based on a wordlist. Files currently need to be placed in > > > /usr/share/vim/vim82/spell/ > > > > > > It would be good if we had a policy and helper scripts to install > > > the files so vim can use them, and how to name the packages. > > > > Hi, Kurt, > > > > This was mentioned a while ago in #490987. It was closed because at > > that time building vim spell files creation seemed to be very memory > > intensive and using libhunspell via a redhat patch was under > > consideration. I have no idea about current status of spellchecking in > > vim and if those concerns were addressed. > > Converting it from .aff and .dic to .spl and .sug takes 2.3 > seconds here and 99 MB of RAM.
Thanks for the info, Kurt. Some (many) years ago, there used to be a vim-spellfiles package containing dictionaries for use with vim. It was removed because of maintainer request (#471285). Reason given by maintainer was "Vim provides its own method for downloading spellfiles that are needed and I don't actually have a computer that can build the spellfiles packages (doing so is quite memory intensive)". Happy to know that things (or computers) were improved. > Note that I need to patch the .aff files to actually make it work > properly because vim doesn't implement all the same things > hunspell does. Knowing that vim does not use standard hunspell files makes things more clear. I thought you meant something like what is done for aspell or ispell dicts, allowing hashes to be built at postinst stage. However, seems that what you would like is to recover something like vim-spellfiles, but adapted to current vim. > I was looking at the libhunspell patch upstream, which seems to be > going nowhere, the pull requests was closed because it wasn't > complete and nobody seems to want to fix it. > > > On the other hand most hunspell dicts come from libreoffice-dicts and > > do not provide a dict-common info file. In my TODO list there is a > > point to play with libreoffice-dicts build process to automatically > > create a minimal info file, but it has been there for years due to > > lack of both time and python skills at that time. > > I have no idea what those files are used for, so I can't even test > that they are correct or not. I assume that it might have something > to do with emacs, but I'm a vim user, not an emacs user. Note that I was thinking about autobuild, and for ispell and aspell some info may be there for hash autobuild, together with for other things like Emacs or jed. I do not object adding a vim section to policy if there is need to coordinate with packages outside the vim environment. However, from what I seem to understand, everything is inside vim ecosystem. spellchecker is part of vim, hunspell dicts need to be adapted for vim and this spellchecking facility seems not to be used outside vim. So we would need to have a better understanding of what is expected. Will vim files be built from a central package (like libreoffice-dicts does for most hunspell dicts) or there will be separate source packages for each dict, probably with different maintainers? If the second, a vim spellckeck policy and helper scripts are useful. Note, however, that I do not use vim, so some help will be needed, where is this feature documented? Regards, -- Agustin
