[procps] Re: Translations
- From: Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: procps@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 14:51:08 +0100
Am Samstag, 28. Dezember 2013, 09:45:00 schrieb Craig Small:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 06:32:54PM +0100, Mario Blättermann wrote:
> ...
> > Yes, of course I would use the TP. But we need an implementation of either
> > po4a or docbook2man in the upstream sources. What would you prefer? In the
> > latter case, the man page authors would need some DocBook skills, but po4a
> > can handle the roff sources directly.
>
> Right, this is for the man pages rather than the text within the
> programs themselves. I personally slightly prefer (or is that slightly
> hate less) roff source over DocBook. However I'm only one person within
> the group. The top manpage is by far the most complicated so I'm not
> sure its worth changing that over; or perhaps Jim has been wanting to
> ditch roff for years and now here is the chance.
>
Then let's use po4a. Although it would be possible to convert the roff source
to DocBook. I've done this with Doclifter [1] for free.1 without problems. But
it failed on top.1 with 77 errors. As far as I can evaluate, it would be
easier to keep the roff formatted man pages and use po4a. Creating the po file
from top.1 with po4a didn't fail.
BTW, there are already some German translations available from the project
man-pages-de [2] (free.1 and uptime.1) which we could migrate back to the
upstream project. There you will also find some useful scripts which add
translator credits, update the pot template and po files and something more.
[1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/doclifter/
[2] https://alioth.debian.org/scm/browser.php?group_id=100531
Best Regards,
Mario
Other related posts:
