From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Tue Jun 4 14:42:34 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 15:42:34 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 12:32:09PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > >i just uploaded a version of pspell-ispell package, for which i need > >some collaboration from ispell dictionary packages....=20 >=20 > Can you give us more details? We may need to add something to the policy= =20 > document about that. >=20 this module needs to know the charmap used somewhere in the wordlist. this info was used to be taken from a pspell-ispell maintainer provided list. for obvious reason it should be provided by the dictionary maintainer. i see the new policy talks also about this in the info file provided by new policy compliant dictionary packages. anyway it is optional while pspell-ispell requires it. what about mandating it? what about a update-ispell build also the pspell-ispell required configuration files with the provided charmap? regards ps: i just RFAed pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and gaspell -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE8/MPKBneQM6IOvFARAhELAJ9ig9vrW2ck6qtL0JNpAsrkZuDEUQCgmPxs IuIw93FYYP1JXc+9dP0CFt8= =vCVi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 5 13:21:53 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:21:53 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: >> > > this module needs to know the charmap used somewhere in the wordlist. I guess here wordlist stands for ispell dict > > this info was used to be taken from a pspell-ispell maintainer provided > list. for obvious reason it should be provided by the dictionary > maintainer. > > i see the new policy talks also about this in the info file provided > by new policy compliant dictionary packages. anyway it is optional > while pspell-ispell requires it. what about mandating it? what about > a update-ispell build also the pspell-ispell required configuration > files with the provided charmap? > Using only that "Coding-System" field is not that straighforward. On the one hand is needed more info than the contents of this field, since also the two characters name of the language is required, as in the british line of make-ispell-pwli british: en-british iso8859-1 On the other hand, the "Coding-System" field of the info file is intended for emacs ispell.el, who currently allows only iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2 and koi8-r charsets. As a matter of fact I am not sure of the role of this field in ispell.el, since I can spellcheck esperanto latin3 texts with emacs, even if the entry for it is put as iso-8859-1 (It did not allow me to put iso-8859-3). That means that putting other values in that field will make ispell.el fail. Having such low number of possibilities is probably a bug in ispell.el I see three possibilities: (a) Adding a new field named for instance 'pspell-pwli' and rebuild the pwli files from it. Not all entries should have this field, for instance for spanish there are two emacs entries castellano and castellano8, but only the first would have that entry. (b) Add some lines in policy telling that ispell dicts maintainers must look at a global file where all pwli entries are and verify if there are proper entries for their ispell dictionaries. In that case update-default-ispell should check for make-ispell-pwli existence and run it if present. (c) Add to policy that ispell packages have to provide such file for each dictionary in the package. I think this is what aspell dictionary packages do and put the responsability about this on maintainers rather than in a common support. One comment, I see that make-ispell-pwli is in /usr/share/pspell and that the generated pwli files are generated in that directory. Is that policy compliant? I assume that normal location for such autogenerated files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that this would not be a problem in case of (c). My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, but I would like to know other points of view. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 5 14:25:00 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:25:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:21:53PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > I guess here wordlist stands for ispell dict yes > Using only that "Coding-System" field is not that straighforward. > > On the one hand is needed more info than the contents of this field, > since also the two characters name of the language is required, as in > the british line of make-ispell-pwli > > british: en-british iso8859-1 > right. i forgot it because it is encoded in the name of the pwli file > One comment, I see that make-ispell-pwli is in /usr/share/pspell and > that the generated pwli files are generated in that directory. Is that > policy compliant? I assume that normal location for such autogenerated no, it isn't policy compliant :( #144883 i was thinking at something like update-pspell-ispell-pwli. once i wrote update-pspell-ispell-pwli i understood that your c) was my best way. and though to send a "couple" of bug reports to ispell dictionary packages (bug reports that i never sent). pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file is required. > files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that > this would not be a problem in case of (c). > indeed :) > My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, > but I would like to know other points of view. > seconded. this would suffices for the needs of pspell-ispell. > Cheers, > :) > Agustin domenico -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 13:10:33 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 14:10:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is > completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file > is required. > So old pwli are no longer removed. That is good, although may leave some files behind. Otherwise pwli files provided by the ispell dicts and not in the make-ispell-pwli file would have been removed each time pspell-ispell is installed. > >>files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that >>this would not be a problem in case of (c). >> > > indeed :) > > >>My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, >>but I would like to know other points of view. >> > > seconded. this would suffices for the needs of pspell-ispell. > > Something like this may fit (partially borrowed from pspell-ispell README): ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The pspell-ispell pwli file for ispell dictionaries: All ispell dictionary packages must provide the corresponding pspell-ispell pwli file for each supplied ispell dictionary. That pwli file must be installed at /usr/share/pspell and named as [-[][-]]-ispell.pwli where is the two letter language code, is the particular spelling when the language has multiple spellings in different parts of the world such as English and is any extra informations to distinguish the hash from other ones with the same language and spelling. is always required while and not. Each pwli file contains exactly one line which contains the full path of the main ispell hash, white space, then the charset, e.g. iso8859-1, koi8-r. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 6 14:25:33 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:25:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 02:10:33PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > > > pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is > > completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file > > is required. > > > > So old pwli are no longer removed. That is good, although may leave some > files behind. Otherwise pwli files provided by the ispell dicts and not > in the make-ispell-pwli file would have been removed each time > pspell-ispell is installed. > hmm.. indeed these files are not owned by pspell-ispell anymore, then can be well written by the ispell dictionary packages.. good, it is a better solution than what i have though about it :) > Something like this may fit (partially borrowed from pspell-ispell README): > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The pspell-ispell pwli file for ispell dictionaries: > ... > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > yes, i think it is appropriate :) thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 6 16:04:41 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 17:04:41 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> Hi Agustín and Domenico, Sorry for being silent on to the present thread. I think that you both reach consensus about how to handle pspell-ispell support. From the little that I saw, I think that it is straightforward to add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed for the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. The location for the automatically generated file must be under the /var hierachy, as Agustín have already pointed out. A question to Domenico: is it easy to change the pkgdatadir of pspell to, say, /var/cache/dictionaries-common/? In order to implement this idea, I will try to hack the installation script of dictionaries-common as soon as I have some free time (may take a while, though, since I am busy right now). Once the pspell feature is added, we will have to update in the Policy document and to rebuild of all the dictionay packages in the staging area. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 16:55:06 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 17:55:06 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > Hi Agustín and Domenico, > > Sorry for being silent on to the present thread. > > I think that you both reach consensus about how to handle pspell-ispell > support. From the little that I saw, I think that it is straightforward to > add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín > suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package > maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the > debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed for > the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and > "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. > > The location for the automatically generated file must be under the /var > hierachy, as Agustín have already pointed out. A question to Domenico: is > it easy to change the pkgdatadir of pspell to, say, > /var/cache/dictionaries-common/? > The other possibility we were talking about is simply telling mantainers to add the required pwli files for each hash in the ispell dictionary package itself, not recreated from the info-ispell file. As a matter of fact if each ispell package provides the proper files at /usr/share/pspell there is no need to recreate anything, and thus the location would still be valid. By the way, that is also the location where aspell dicts put their pwli files, and they are 'real' package files, no autogenerated ones. I think this other possibility is much simpler and straighforward, requiring only a minor change in policy and of course rebuilding the dictionaries. From my point of view, recreating everything each time a new dictionary is added is an unnecesary extra complexity. If we can in addition make things easier adding to installdeb-ispell the possibility to install such pwli files automatically, better, but we must keep in mind that each single package can install more that one hash (see e.g. inorwegian), and so may need more than one pwli file. > In order to implement this idea, I will try to hack the installation script > of dictionaries-common as soon as I have some free time (may take a while, > though, since I am busy right now). Once the pspell feature is added, we > will have to update in the Policy document and to rebuild of all the > dictionay packages in the staging area. > I would not touch the installation scripts for this, but think about a good way to make installdeb-ispell more clever about this. This could be done using a new field in the info-ispell file, but used to automatically generate and install the pwli files during package build, not during package install. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 17:44:39 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:44:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: >> add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín >> suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package >> maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the >> debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed >> for >> the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and >> "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the "Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason why I prefer the other system. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 10:55:59 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 11:55:59 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 18:44]: > I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only > iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs > entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the > "Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason > why I prefer the other system. I do not think that this is a problem. I can easily modify the build_emacsen_support subroutine in DictionariesCommon.pm, such that no emacsen entry is created when the "Coding-System" field differs from one of the three above. What do you think? -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 7 12:10:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 13:10:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 18:44]: > > >>I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only >>iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs >>entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the >>"Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason >>why I prefer the other system. > > > I do not think that this is a problem. I can easily modify the > build_emacsen_support subroutine in DictionariesCommon.pm, such that no > emacsen entry is created when the "Coding-System" field differs from one of > the three above. What do you think? > No entry also does not work, you need to put exactly one of those entries, otherwise will fail too, (debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry '("american" "[A-Za-z]" "[^A-Za-z]" "[']" nil ("-B") nil nil) "american") will give an error set-variable: Value `(("american" "[A-Za-z]" ... does not match type repeat of ispell-dictionary-alist as well as putting iso8859-1. This latter may also be a problem for the pspell entries, which use iso8859-1 instead of iso-8859-1. Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Otherwise we can always use something like a 'Pspell-ispell:' two elements field in the info file: Pspell-ispell:sv iso8859-1 without any sort of mapping. From the other message: > > Okay, I buy your arguments and also think that changing installdeb-ispell is > the way to go. There will be no problems with multiple hashes, since the > Perl code in installdeb-ispell can parse the multiple definitions in the > ispell-info file. I will try to take a look at the implementation. I was also looking at the installdeb-in source and seems not difficult to make it behave as we want, as a matter of fact it already parses the info file for testing its presence. One more thing we should also consider when doing that, two different info-ispell definitions can correspond to a unique hash (e.g. castellano and castellano8) giving different emacs entries, so one possibility os to allow some definitions not having a pspell field. Although this is probably not a problem if there are pspell fields in the two entries, since the later pspell-ispell file will overwrite the previous one with the same info. Cheers Agustin, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 7 17:25:14 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 18:25:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3D00DE6A.1060506@aq.upm.es> Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > > as well as putting iso8859-1. This latter may also be a problem for the > pspell entries, which use iso8859-1 instead of iso-8859-1. > > Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as > iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for > pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Is that one the list of the charmaps provided by libpspell4? cp1252.map iso8859-1.map iso8859-10.map iso8859-13.map iso8859-14.map iso8859-15.map iso8859-2.map iso8859-3.map iso8859-4.map iso8859-5.map iso8859-6.map iso8859-7.map iso8859-8.map iso8859-9.map koi8-r.map There are some other files, this is obviously not a charmap: region-to-spelling.map and I have no idea about this one: viscii.map -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 17:52:30 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 18:52:30 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> References: <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607165230.GW3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-07 13:10]: > No entry also does not work, you need to put exactly one of those > entries, otherwise will fail too, > > (debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry > '("american" > "[A-Za-z]" > "[^A-Za-z]" > "[']" > nil > ("-B") > nil > nil) > "american") > > will give an error > > [...] Sorry, I was not very clear. My proposal was to test if "Coding-System" is one of the allowed ones and, if not, then suppress the whole debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry for that dictionary. > Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as > iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for > pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Otherwise we can always use something > like a 'Pspell-ispell:' two elements field in the info file: > > Pspell-ispell:sv iso8859-1 > > without any sort of mapping. That is a better way to cope with the issue because, at any rate, the maintainer will have to supply the parts of the name of the pwli file. > One more thing we should also consider when doing that, two different > info-ispell definitions can correspond to a unique hash (e.g. castellano > and castellano8) giving different emacs entries, so one possibility os > to allow some definitions not having a pspell field. Although this is > probably not a problem if there are pspell fields in the two entries, > since the later pspell-ispell file will overwrite the previous one with > the same info. Right. If we adopt the "Pspell-ispell" field as above, then the problem disappears. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 10:51:18 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 11:51:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607095118.GT3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 17:55]: > The other possibility we were talking about is simply telling mantainers > to add the required pwli files for each hash in the ispell dictionary > package itself, not recreated from the info-ispell file. As a matter of > fact if each ispell package provides the proper files at > /usr/share/pspell there is no need to recreate anything, and thus the > location would still be valid. By the way, that is also the location > where aspell dicts put their pwli files, and they are 'real'package > files, no autogenerated ones. > > I think this other possibility is much simpler and straighforward, > requiring only a minor change in policy and of course rebuilding the > dictionaries. From my point of view, recreating everything each time a > new dictionary is added is an unnecesary extra complexity. I think that both implementations have comparable complexity. The advantage of changing installdeb-ispell to include the pwli files in the binary package is that we keep the usual directory for libpspell. > If we can in addition make things easier adding to installdeb-ispell the > possibility to install such pwli files automatically, better, but we > must keep in mind that each single package can install more that one > hash (see e.g. inorwegian), and so may need more than one pwli file. > > I would not touch the installation scripts for this, but think about a > good way to make installdeb-ispell more clever about this. This could > be done using a new field in the info-ispell file, but used to > automatically generate and install the pwli files during package build, > not during package install. Okay, I buy your arguments and also think that changing installdeb-ispell is the way to go. There will be no problems with multiple hashes, since the Perl code in installdeb-ispell can parse the multiple definitions in the ispell-info file. I will try to take a look at the implementation. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Sat Jun 8 19:57:09 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 20:57:09 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files Message-ID: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the versioned library package.) I also uploaded a modified ibrazilian package to the staging. I just added the line: Pspell-Ispell: pt-brazilian iso8859-1 to the debian/info-ispell file. After installation, I have: $ cat /usr/share/pspell/pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli /usr/lib/ispell/brasileiro.hash iso8859-1 Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. -- Rafael --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=pspell-patch Index: debian/control =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/dict-common/dictionaries-common/debian/control,v retrieving revision 1.48 diff -u -r1.48 control --- debian/control 7 Jun 2002 11:14:54 -0000 1.48 +++ debian/control 8 Jun 2002 18:48:34 -0000 @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Package: dictionaries-common-dev Architecture: all -Depends: debhelper (>> 2.0.89), dictionaries-common (>> 0.3.6) +Depends: debhelper (>> 2.0.89), dictionaries-common (>> 0.3.6), libpspell4 Description: Common utilities and Policy for spelling dictionary tools WARNING: THIS PACKAGE IS ALPHA SOFTWARE! . Index: scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/dict-common/dictionaries-common/scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.4 installdeb.in --- scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in 28 Nov 2001 20:27:02 -0000 1.4 +++ scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in 8 Jun 2002 18:48:34 -0000 @@ -39,15 +39,34 @@ doit ("install", "-d", $lib_dir); doit ("install", "-m644", $infofile, "$lib_dir/$package"); + # Install the Pspell .pwli files for each dictionary found in the + # info file. This is only done for the ispell dictionary + # installation. + if ($class eq "ispell") { + my $pspell_dir = tmpdir ($package) . `pspell-config pkgdatadir`; + chomp $pspell_dir; + foreach my $d (keys %{$dicts}) { + if (exists $dicts->{$d}->{'pspell-ispell'}) { + my ($name, $charcod) = split (/\s+/, $dicts->{$d}->{"pspell-ispell"}); + doit ("install", "-d", $pspell_dir) + if (not -d $pspell_dir); + open (PWLI, "> $pspell_dir/$name-ispell.pwli"); + print PWLI + "/usr/lib/ispell/$dicts->{$d}->{'hash-name'}.hash $charcod\n"; + close PWLI; + } + } + } + # Generate the config file. First, test if # debian/[package.]config exists and trigger an error if it is the # case. --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP-- From Rafael Laboissiere Sun Jun 9 12:10:51 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 13:10:51 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020609111051.GA3424@laboiss0> * Rafael Laboissiere [2002-06-08 20:57]: > Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am > sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. Just to complement my message: I tested libpspell with my updated ibrazilian package (containing the pwli file) by compiling and running the example program /usr/share/doc/libpspell-dev/examples/example-c.c.gz. It works fine: $ cc example-c.c -o example-c -lpspell $ ./example-c pt Using: pt-brazilian--ispell Type "h"for help. c casa correct -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 10 15:06:56 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:06:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in > installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and > scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. Wonderful, thanks > > The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, > because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much > better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the > versioned library package.) I also have to add a conflicts with pspell-ispell lower than that in unstable. Otherwise the old pwli creation script will remove pwli entries and will not regenerate them for ispell dicts not having an entry in make-ispell-pwli. This means I will also upload to the staging area the pspell-ispell debs from unstable, so people running woody can check this system. > (BTW, a much better place for this script would be the libspell-dev > package, and not the versioned library package.) Domenico, what do you think? > > I also uploaded a modified ibrazilian package to the staging. I just added > the line: > > Pspell-Ispell: pt-brazilian iso8859-1 > > to the debian/info-ispell file. After installation, I have: > > $ cat /usr/share/pspell/pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli > /usr/lib/ispell/brasileiro.hash iso8859-1 > > Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am > sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. I have tested them for the hungarian dict and everything works like a charm. It looks O.K.. The only posssible change I see is putting it under 'slice' control, so it is ignored for installdeb-wordlist. I have modified the policy document in my local copy to take care of the pspell-ispell stuff. I will commit all that this afternoon. I think the pspell-ispell adition deserves bumping the version to 0.6.0. I have nearly ready packages for swedish and hungarian that will be uploaded soon. Once they are uploaded and all other ispell dicts are rebuilt for pspell-ispell compatibility we will have ports for all dicts in unstable to the new system. I do not know when I will have time to write a draft for a new circular to IDWP maintainers, may be tomorrow, and surely not today. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 10 23:50:10 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:50:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020610225010.GW3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-10 16:06]: > I have tested them for the hungarian dict and everything works like a > charm. It looks O.K.. The only posssible change I see is putting it > under 'slice' control, so it is ignored for installdeb-wordlist. Actually, it is already "under slice control", because the code does not get executed in installdeb-wordlist (it checks the $class variable). I will eventually adopt your suggestion, since the $class variable was not created with that intent. > I have modified the policy document in my local copy to take care of > the pspell-ispell stuff. I will commit all that this afternoon. I think the > pspell-ispell adition deserves bumping the version to 0.6.0. Sure. -- Rafael From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:13:39 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:13:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 08:57:09PM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in > installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and > scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. > > The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, > because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much > better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the > versioned library package.) > eh... so you think that destination dir should be decided at build time? hm.. yes, it much better... i was forced to put in libpspell4 because it was called on every dictionary install and then it was not acceptable to make dictionaries depend on libpspell-dev. not things are changed. i need to make a new release of pspell, could i have access to the stage area? thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 16:00:20 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 17:00:20 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020627150020.GX3424@laboiss0> * Domenico Andreoli [2002-06-27 15:13]: > i need to make a new release of pspell, could i have access to the stage > area? If your new release will not break anything in unstable, you do not really need the staging area. Otherwise, since you are now a member of the dict-common project, just cvs chekout the www module and you will find there a script called sf-dictrelease, which you should use for uploading packages to the staging area. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 11 14:37:05 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:37:05 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Problems with the sourceforge server Message-ID: <3D05FD01.50103@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Seems that sourceforge has changed its server yesterday. That is producing some problems, since now when uploading a new dict package to sourceforge, I get the error chmod: changing permissions of `/home/groups/d/di/dict-common/htdocs/testing/sources/iportuguese_19980611-8.diff.gz': Operation not permitted for all files at the staging area not owned by the uploader (me). The package itself is uploaded (with g=r not g=rw), but the Packages and Sources files are not recreated and no mail is sent because of the previous error. Seems that the new server does not like chmod -R g=u $www_dir for files not owned by the person doing the upload. I have changed things to something like PKGFILES=`cat $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.list | sed 's:\.\/:\ :g' | tr -s \n' ' '` # previous command in one line ( cd $www_dir && chmod g=u $PKGFILES ) and seems to work. Currently I changed things only in my experimental uploader 'ureleasedeb', a more general version of 'sf-dictrelease', so 'sf-dicrelease' is still broken. I hope to test this more extensively and then port changes to 'sf-dictrelease'. Of course any other suggestion is welcome. In the meantime do not surprise too much if you find the same error. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 11 16:59:30 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 17:59:30 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Problems with the sourceforge server References: <3D05FD01.50103@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3D061E62.60202@aq.upm.es> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000605000503010304070300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agust=EDn Mart=EDn Domingo wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > Seems that sourceforge has changed its server yesterday. That is=20 > producing some problems, since now when uploading a new dict package to= =20 > sourceforge, I get the error >=20 > chmod: changing permissions of=20 > `/home/groups/d/di/dict-common/htdocs/testing/sources/iportuguese_19980= 611-8.diff.gz':=20 > Operation not permitted >=20 > for all files at the staging area not owned by the uploader (me). >=20 > The package itself is uploaded (with g=3Dr not g=3Drw), but the Package= s and=20 > Sources files are not recreated and no mail is sent because of the=20 > previous error. >=20 > Seems that the new server does not like >=20 > chmod -R g=3Du $www_dir Changed also in sf-dictrelease in CVS. For those curious, attached is=20 the patch against previous sf-dictrelease Cheers, Agustin --=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html --------------000605000503010304070300 Content-Type: text/plain; name="patch.sf-dictrelease" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="patch.sf-dictrelease" --- sf-dictrelease.orig Tue Jun 11 17:50:20 2002 +++ sf-dictrelease Tue Jun 11 17:55:28 2002 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ #! /bin/bash -# $Id: sf-dictrelease,v 1.15 2002/06/04 12:06:45 agmartin Exp $ +# $Id: sf-dictrelease,v 1.16 2002/06/11 15:55:28 agmartin Exp $ # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # sf-dictrelease: A script that will make a local release of a package # First intended to release a dictionary to the sourceforge stage area @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@ make_controldata create_info_file > $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.info ( cd $DESTDIR && tar -cvzf ../${TARBALL} . ) + PKGFILES=`cat $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.list | tr -s '\n' ' '` } install_sources(){ @@ -267,7 +268,8 @@ $rcp_command ../${TARBALL} $www_dir_remote $rsh_command "tar xzf $www_dir/${TARBALL} -C $www_dir; rm -f $www_dir/${TARBALL}" if [ "$REMOTE" == "yes" ]; then - $rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; chmod -R g=u $www_dir" + #$rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; chmod -R g=u $www_dir" + $rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; ( cd $www_dir && chmod g=u $PKGFILES )" fi ) } --------------000605000503010304070300-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 14 11:24:07 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:24:07 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? Message-ID: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> Hi all, We currently have at the sourceforge staging area ports of dictionaries and wordlists for all such packages in Debian. Since we have tested the system for major bugs for a while I think it is time to consider whether we are ready for migration, and if we are, set a deadline for all the final tests before the migration is done. For that I would like to know whether you also find the new policy system mature enough, and what is your point of view about the transition. I have written a first draft for notification of a deadline to IDWP maintainers and put it at the sourceforge CVS at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/dict-common/www/staging-area/ANNOUNCE.pre-final This document still needs some work, but I would prefer not leaving things dormant a long time. There are some things that need to be decided: - Is the system mature enough? - Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. - How transition will be carried out. What do you think about all this? Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 15:59:23 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 16:59:23 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 12:24]: > - Is the system mature enough? Yes, I think so. Even if it may not be complete (is it worthwhile to include aspell support? what about abiword?), I think that the existing support (debconf, emacsen, jed, mutt) is mature enough. > - Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of > people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to > July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. I will be completely unavailable during August. Hopefully, if the announcement happens before the Summer, it will not come too late in July. > - How transition will be carried out. I think that your proposal in ANNOUNCE.pre-final. We have just to make sure that the IDWP mainainer feel themselves comfortable with the new system. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 17:13:39 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 18:13:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> Replying to my own message: * Rafael Laboissiere [2002-06-14 16:59]: > Yes, I think so. Even if it may not be complete (is it worthwhile to > include aspell support? what about abiword?), [...] I just checked the AbiWord situation. The AbiWord executable (from the abiword-gtk package, I did not check the abiword-gnome package) is linked against libpspell4. This means that just by introducing Pspell support in dictionaries-common, we got AbiWord support for free, at least for dictionaries providing pwli files. Indeed, if I launch: $ LANGUAGE=fr abiword the correct spelling language "French (France)" is selected (because the ifrench package has the file /usr/share/pspell/fr-ispell.pwli). However, I do not know how to select language variants (like pt_BR and pt_PT). Of course, I can launch either: $ LANGUAGE=pt_PT abiword or: $ LANGUAGE=pt_BR abiword and the correct language will be selected [viz. "Portuguese (Portugal)" or "Portuguese "(Brazil)"], but the selected pwli file seems to be always pt-european-ispell.pwli. Indeed, I cannot see how abiword could translate the language variant identification "PT" or "BR" into viz. "pt-european-ispell.pwli" or "pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli". Any clue? -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 19:42:40 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:42:40 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D0A344B.6080704@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> <3D0A344B.6080704@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614184240.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 20:22]: > More amazing, that seems to work for english both for aspell and ispell > > LANGUAGE=en_US abiword > > complaints about 'colour' and 'behaviour' and accepts 'color' and > 'behavior' while > > LANGUAGE=en_UK abiword > > just do the opposite. This only work for aspell. If I completely remove aspell and libaspell from my system and launch $ LANGUAGE=en_UK abiword it accepts çolor'and refuses 'colour'. I guess that abiword first try to use aspell, and only resort to libpspell as a fallback. I guess that this problem will be quite hard to fix. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 14 19:44:18 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:44:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > However, I do not know how to select language variants (like pt_BR and > pt_PT). Of course, I can launch either: > > $ LANGUAGE=pt_PT abiword > > or: > > $ LANGUAGE=pt_BR abiword > > and the correct language will be selected [viz. "Portuguese (Portugal)" or > "Portuguese "(Brazil)"], but the selected pwli file seems to be always > pt-european-ispell.pwli. Indeed, I cannot see how abiword could translate > the language variant identification "PT" or "BR" into viz. > "pt-european-ispell.pwli" or "pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli". > > Any clue? > Good news!! Just after sending to you the previous message I tried to grep the pspell sources and I think I got it. The key is the /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map file, belonging to the libpspell4 package. It currently has only $ cat /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map # Pspell region to spelling map file # NOTE: language codes are in all lowercase en_us american en_gb british en_ca canadian That is why I succeded with both british and american. Adding pt_br brazilian pt_pt portuguese to that file, things do work as expected. Kepping the words astronomicamente antenupcial marked and toggling language between portuguese and brazilian in the pop-up menu the wrong word toggles too. Probably this worths a wish to upstream. With respect to us, pspell can put a Debian specific file with entries for all ispell dicts known in Debian (they will surely work for aspell too), or we can handle that diverting that file, but it is simpler from the libpspell4 package. Have a nice weekend, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 20:06:18 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:06:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614190618.GV3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 20:44]: > The key is the /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map file, belonging > to the libpspell4 package. It currently has only You are a genious. It works, thanks. Forget about my previous message. However: > pt_br brazilian > pt_pt portuguese This should be rather: pt_br brazilian pt_pt european > Probably this worths a wish to upstream. With respect to us, pspell can > put a Debian specific file with entries for all ispell dicts known in > Debian (they will surely work for aspell too), or we can handle that > diverting that file, but it is simpler from the libpspell4 package. We might indeed add support for adding items to that file in dictionaries-common, but I am not sure about what is better to do. First of all, the region-to-spelling.map file must change its location to be either under /etc or /var. Also, we need to add a new field to the ispell-info file (for instance, "Locale"). Using this information, it would be easy to modifiy the relevant line when installing the package and to delete the said line when the package is removed. On the other hand, we might ask to the maintainer of libspell to just change the upstream file and add all the necessary entries for all dictionaries present in Debian. The drawback of this method is that individual IDWP maintainers will loose control on pspell behavior, and there will be a burden upon libpspell maintainer's shoulders. A third possibility will be to have dictionaries-common diverting the file, but the drawback mentioned above will remains. > Have a nice weekend, You two, and good look for Spain against Ireland! -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 09:57:14 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:57:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DA46A.4080800@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote:> > > >>- Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of >> people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to >> July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. > > > I will be completely unavailable during August. Hopefully, if the > announcement happens before the Summer, it will not come too late in July. > I would have preferred doing things before summer, but I cannot avoid fearing any unexpected problem in the middle of August when none of us can take care of it. I have no idea about the availability of David, Roland and the other IDWP maintainers, but considering the amount of people involved I would find strange if we can do the whole transition and still have a reasonable period of time to watch the behavior of the packages before August comes. > >>- How transition will be carried out. > > > I think that your proposal in ANNOUNCE.pre-final. We have just to make sure > that the IDWP mainainer feel themselves comfortable with the new system. > That is another thing. I do not know how maintainers would feel with a two or three weeks deadline. For some of them is probably a very short period of time. I plan to rewrite the message to a 'dict-common news' covering the last additions to the policy and the need to set a deadline. We can offer a normal deadline at the first days of September, or if maintainers really want to do the transition as soon as possible do that in a couple of weeks, leaving July full for testing. In practice, this possibility of choices probably means Septemper, but who knows. In any case they should know the deadline before the 15th of July. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Sun Jun 16 15:57:02 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 16:57:02 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map Message-ID: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> Okay, it is raining today in my town and I could not refrain myself from implementing the automatic generation of the regions-to-spelling.map file of the libspell4 package. First of all, I apologize for going on without waiting for the follow-up of the discussion. For that reason, I consider my changes quite experimental, and if it happens that I made bad choices, we can revert the code to the previous state. I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to keep up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. The dictionaries-common generates now automatically the regions-to-spelling.map file each time a new dictionary is installed (in the same way JEd and emacsen support is generated). This file is now in /var/cache/dictionaries-common. In order to make things work without changes in the libpspell package, the dictionaries-common package does two things: 1) Diversion of the /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map file. (This is why a new debian/dictionaries-common.preinst has been added.) 2) Creation of the symlink /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map -> /var/cache/dictionaries-common/regions-to-spelling.map On the IDWP maitainer side, the only new thing that is required is the addition of a new field in debian/info-ispell file, like this: Locale: pt_BR I committed the changes to the dict-common CVS repository and uploaded to the staging area two modified Ispell dict package: ibrazilian and iportuguese. I tested the changes with abiword and it seems to work. Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agustín? :-) make the necessary changes to the Policy document. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 09:46:29 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:46:29 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > Okay, it is raining today in my town and I could not refrain myself from > implementing the automatic generation of the regions-to-spelling.map file of > the libspell4 package. > > First of all, I apologize for going on without waiting for the follow-up of > the discussion. For that reason, I consider my changes quite experimental, > and if it happens that I made bad choices, we can revert the code to the > previous state. > > I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of > regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a > burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to keep > up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. > Wonderful. Thanks for doing that. I see one important problem about that. I think that file is or can also be used by aspell dictionaries, so we are taking power on something not currently covered by the policy. However that is a step towards the future if at sometime aspell gets integrated. In the meantime, if we do not want aspell packages to be affected, we must make sure that entries in diverted 'regions-to-spelling.map' are always merged and present in the autogenerated one. Also, we should not use different names for entries already there. This is still putting our feet out of the policy scope, but at least we are only adding things to the existing ones, not changing or removing previous definitions. We should also notify this to the pspell maintainer. Domenico, has that package already been adopted? > The dictionaries-common generates now automatically the > regions-to-spelling.map file each time a new dictionary is installed (in the > same way JEd and emacsen support is generated). This file is now in > /var/cache/dictionaries-common. In order to make things work without > changes in the libpspell package, the dictionaries-common package does two > things: > > 1) Diversion of the /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map file. > (This is why a new debian/dictionaries-common.preinst has been > added.) > > 2) Creation of the symlink /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map -> > /var/cache/dictionaries-common/regions-to-spelling.map > > On the IDWP maitainer side, the only new thing that is required is the > addition of a new field in debian/info-ispell file, like this: > > Locale: pt_BR > > I committed the changes to the dict-common CVS repository and uploaded to > the staging area two modified Ispell dict package: ibrazilian and > iportuguese. I tested the changes with abiword and it seems to work. > As a matter of fact, I think that the only affected packages are english dicts and portuguese dicts. Norwegian uses different language locales for bokmal and nynorsk (I have to change that in the norwegian dict, currently is wrong). > Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my > changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agustín? :-) make > the necessary changes to the Policy document. > I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks about this. By the way, I have seen that Peter Makholm, danish and faroese dicts maintainer has sent an ITA for aspell. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 14:22:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:22:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > Merging is rather complicated to implement, since the > regions-to-spelling.map file is always generated from scratch in the > present implementation. We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > > >>I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks >>about this. > > > Me too. Is he hearing to this mailing list? > He said he was, but you can check that as list manager for dict-common-dev. I am also cc'ing him this mail just in case. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 17 14:39:03 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:39:03 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 15:22]: > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their > values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry > with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add > the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its > way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated > with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I have to have the requested info. At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, among others). -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 15:08:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:08:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by > aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > have to have the requested info. > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. > At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of > Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will > open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, > among others). > Yes, I am also very surprised about how useful is pspell. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 17 16:10:00 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:10:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 16:08]: > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly > required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell > is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants > currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that > corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that > those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, > thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell > for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. I implemented your suggestion and cvs committed the changes in the DictionariesCommon.pm.in file. Please test. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 17:09:37 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:09:37 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 16:08]: > > >>I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly >>required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell >>is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants >>currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that >>corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that >>those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, >>thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell >>for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. > > > I implemented your suggestion and cvs committed the changes in the > DictionariesCommon.pm.in file. Please test. > Thanks, what a fast reaction! I tested it and works as expected. Just one minor thing, I first updated dictionaries-common and so was a while without any valid regions-to-spelling.map, but as soon as I installed a new ispell dict everything worked as expected. This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. This is a rather strange case, but might worth adding a call to '/usr/sbin/update-default-ispell --rebuild' to the configure section of dictionaries-common.postinst. What do you think? Another really minor thing. It would be good to not only say at the autogenerated regions-to-spelling.map file that it is autogenerated, but also say who did it e.g. 'tools from the dictionaries-common package'. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:39:14 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:39:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626173914.GG4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 06:09:37PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Another really minor thing. It would be good to not only say at the > autogenerated regions-to-spelling.map file that it is autogenerated, but > also say who did it e.g. 'tools from the dictionaries-common package'. > this is good idea. since no debian packages will own it, dpkg -S would not be of help understanding who/what is in charge for it. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:42:53 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:42:53 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 06:09:37PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Just one minor thing, I first updated dictionaries-common and so was a > while without any valid regions-to-spelling.map, but as soon as I > installed a new ispell dict everything worked as expected. > hmmm... > This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. > dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, > but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. > this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 26 18:25:48 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:25:48 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: >>This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. >>dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, >>but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. >> > > this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install > an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! > Then we must preserve the diversion, so if dictionaries-common is not installed there is always a valid regions-to-spelling.map. In the future, when we know more about how to deal with dictionaries-common and aspell this latter might depend on dictionaries-common. That would be required if some sort of update-default-aspell script is used to add entries from aspell dicts to regions-to-spelling.map file. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Wed Jun 26 18:53:56 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:53:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626175356.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-26 19:25]: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > >>This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. > >>dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, > >>but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. > >> > > > >this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install > >an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! > > > Then we must preserve the diversion, so if dictionaries-common is not > installed there is always a valid regions-to-spelling.map. I vote for preserving the diversion, too. -- Rafael From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:37:06 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:37:06 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626173706.GF4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 04:08:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > > > >Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed > >by > >aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > >have to have the requested info. > > > > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly > required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with > aspell is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english my experience too is not too high :( i learned many things on it only lately... definitively i'm not a good maintainer for it. anyway i also suppose that nothing is required if the corresponding dictionary is not installed. > >At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration > >of > >Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will good, at least i'm not obstructing a wanted evolution towards higher quality :) -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:27:21 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:27:21 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020626172721.GE4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:39:03PM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agust?n Mart?n Domingo [2002-06-17 15:22]: > > > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their > > values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry > > with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add > > the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its > > way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated > > with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > > Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by > aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > have to have the requested info. > i don't think aspell requires anything. this file should be used only when the aspell asks for language tags (it is a way to ask aspell for a particular dictionary/language/jrgon/dilect/whatever) like en_GB or it_IT in order to know which worldlist should be taken, since their name starts with the extended name of the language. > At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of > Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will > open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, > among others). > there is also gnome-spell, which is a component that wraps around pspell. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 19 15:58:44 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:58:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020619145844.GA4546@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:22:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > Me too. Is he hearing to this mailing list? > > > He said he was, but you can check that as list manager for > dict-common-dev. I am also cc'ing him this mail just in case. > yes, i'm subscribed. only i'm in the middle of exam session and i cannot pay to much attention. i cannot express my idea on something i cannot look at. mails are still here, i'll look at them as soon as possible. sorry thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:22:35 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:22:35 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626172235.GD4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:22:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > > > > Merging is rather complicated to implement, since the > > regions-to-spelling.map file is always generated from scratch in the > > present implementation. > > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have > their values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new > entry with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and > if not add the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if > aspell makes its way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide > entries duplicated with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > marging is not required is pspell start to not provide regions-to-spelling.map . this is my intention. let me know -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:21:05 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:21:05 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626172105.GC4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 10:46:29AM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: .. > > > >I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of > >regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a > >burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to > >keep > >up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. > > > > Wonderful. Thanks for doing that. > yes, wonderful. pspell has a bug for this file. #144884. > I see one important problem about that. I think that file is or can also > be used by aspell dictionaries, so we are taking power on something not > currently covered by the policy. However that is a step towards the > future if at sometime aspell gets integrated. > i agree > In the meantime, if we do not want aspell packages to be affected, we > must make sure that entries in diverted 'regions-to-spelling.map' are > always merged and present in the autogenerated one. Also, we should not > use different names for entries already there. This is still putting our > feet out of the policy scope, but at least we are only adding things to > the existing ones, not changing or removing previous definitions. > oh, nothing is more easy. i can release a libpspell without regions-to-spelling.map. this file is provided by the upstream as is. i only need to delete it from the package before the deb creation:) > We should also notify this to the pspell maintainer. Domenico, has that > package already been adopted? > no, i'm still in charge for it. i'll upload a new version soon. > As a matter of fact, I think that the only affected packages are english > dicts and portuguese dicts. Norwegian uses different language locales > for bokmal and nynorsk (I have to change that in the norwegian dict, > currently is wrong). > maybe also for spanish and french? i don't know. > >Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my > >changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agust?n? :-) > >make > >the necessary changes to the Policy document. > > > > I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks > about this. > yesss.. please continue with this work :) you guys are doing a great job even without the support i should provide you. thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 14:31:32 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:31:32 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Draft for a sort of news bulletin Message-ID: <3D0DE4B4.4040300@aq.upm.es> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090409040607090706040902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, Since it seems that we will not have time for a deadline before summer I have rewritten the ANNOUNCE.pre-final to something looking more a news bulletin to show maintaners the latest news about the project and introducing the proximity of a deadline for the transition. Alhough the document leaves the door open to an enthusiastic call for a fast transition, reallity points to september. Find attached a draft. A copy is in the CVS. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html --------------090409040607090706040902 Content-Type: text/plain; name="ANNOUNCE.news1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ANNOUNCE.news1" Hi all, Welcome to the latest news related to the dict-common project for=20 Debian. This project has to do with policy and common support for=20 ispell dictionaries and wordlists in Debian. - On the one hand, we are pleased to announce a further step in the=20 dictionaries-common project: We now have at the sourceforge=20 staging area ports to the new system of all ispell dictionaries=20 and wordlists currently in Debian! - On the other hand, we have a nice latest new: policy now covers=20 compatibility with pspell-ispell modules. That means that e.g.=20 abiword now works properly with the ispell dictionaries following=20 this new policy. This means that we can make a full testing of the whole system to=20 debug for major problems. So, please, test and test. It is our point=20 of view that minor problems can be debugged in the official Debian=20 repository after the transition has been carried out.=20 This brings us to the need for a deadline. Our initial candidate for=20 a deadline was the end of this month, but real life, work on=20 integration of pspell support and building of the remaining packages=20 has taken a bit more than expected. This has probably made this=20 deadline too short. If we move the deadline to some week in July we=20 have the problem that August is coming and that in that month many=20 of us will be unavailable. So seems more reasonable to set the=20 deadline in the first days of September unless you really want the=20 transition to be done right now (that is, in a couple of weeks). In=20 any case please let us know what do you think about this. One important thing: we are trying to do our best to keep in sync=20 packages in the sourceforge staging area with packages in Debian=20 unstable. But remember that both systems are no longer compatible,=20 so please do not upload any old style ispell dictionary or wordlist=20 packages to Debian in the meantime. That will confuse the transition.=20 If you really have to do it, drop us an email first. That way the=20 version in the Conflicts line of dictionaries-common can be changed=20 in time and your new package will not break anything. A new policy=20 package in sync with the official one (and a higher version) should=20 then be put at the sourceforge staging area. Since the migration needs to be done in a highly coordinated way to=20 have it done in the minimum possible period of time after the deadline,=20 we need to know which are your plans with respect to it. Note that=20 after the new ispell and dictionaries-common are uploaded to Debian=20 all previous ispell dictionaries and wordlists will become=20 uninstallable. So, please let us know what you do prefer. In any case, please contact=20 us through the dict-common-dev mailing list, so we know you are not MIA. If you are still not subscribed to the dict-common-dev mailing list at=20 sourceforge, that is the best way to get in touch with us and discuss=20 the final details of the transition. Remember that the project page is at: http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ Your dictionaries-common team: Rafael Laboissi=E8re, David Coe, Agust=EDn Mart=EDn Domingo --------------090409040607090706040902-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 21 12:07:00 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:07:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D106190.6080908@aq.upm.es> <20020620174250.GA25148@cs.helsinki.fi> Message-ID: <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> Kai Hendry wrote: > On ke, kesä 19, 2002 at 12:48:48 +0200, Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > >>>When I write emails with mutt, I generally write them in vim, so that >>>kills two birds with one stone. >>> >> >>How do you select different languages? > > > I guess I have to reconfigure aspell. I can send a post to vim users > mailing list asking what is the general consensus of doing spell checks. > Would you like me to do that? As a matter of fact, that info can also be of help for use of ispell as spellchecker under vim and friends. I guess that something similar in concept to ispell-wrapper can be used for aspell but until the Debian aspell people can find a time slice to see how can aspell be integrated in the policy do not expect big results. > > I was wondering if standard key binds can be incorporated to the doc if > possible. We currently include only info about that for jed, since that key bind is added by dictionaries-common. The other keybinds are supposed to belong to the documentation of the respective editors, and are not under our control, that is why we did not add them. Thanks for your help, Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 19:34:25 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 20:34:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy In-Reply-To: <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D106190.6080908@aq.upm.es> <20020620174250.GA25148@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626183425.GI4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 01:07:00PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > As a matter of fact, that info can also be of help for use of ispell as > spellchecker under vim and friends. I guess that something similar in > concept to ispell-wrapper can be used for aspell but until the Debian > aspell people can find a time slice to see how can aspell be integrated > in the policy do not expect big results. [pspell side] in the interface to pspell a way to pass options is available. i don't know which is, but this is a matter of the developer using pspell. looking at url http://aspell.net/pspell-man/4_Library.html#SECTION00540000000000000000 we see that an option named "language-tag" select the language to be used for the check. this is provided by the application *to* pspell. [pspell-aspell side] libaspell shared library (and then aspell binary) manages a system of configuration files to decide various options like the language to be used. aspell module for pspell passes this option after having got it somewhere (configuration files, defaults...). please look at http://aspell.net/aspell-man/5_Customizing.html#SECTION00610000000000000000 [pspell-ispell side] ispell module for pspell seems to not provide a "language-tag" option to pspell. this sounds strange to me but through the 600 lines of code of the only source file of pspell-ispell language-tag is never mentioned. so if you want to choose a language for the check with pspell-ispell you are on you own. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 12:09:02 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:09:02 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> Message-ID: <3D10664E.30808@aq.upm.es> Resending to dict-common-dev for archival: ------------------------------------------ Kai Hendry wrote: > I do agree some "policy" is required to sort out the dictionary AND > (please) translation dictionary mess in debian (SID). > > However, I am little dissapointed by you use of : > > ispell, well, i use *aspell*, and is that not much better !?? We are already in touch with previous aspell maintainer (and he reads the dict-common-dev mailing list). As a matter of fact was after his suggestion that we currently have full pspell-ispell support. When asking aspell dict maintainers about the possibility of integrating aspell they thought it was not as urgent as for ispell and wordlists, since there is no defaults symlinks and all the endless questions on packages installation. However that is in the todo list he passed to the new aspell maintainer, and we are waiting for feedback from them, so I expect aspell dicts to be integrated at some time in the policy. Of course any sugestion about how to do that is welcome. > > Emacs spelling? Joe? I use vim. I added this line to my .vimrc > > " Spell check > map :w!:!aspell check %:e! % > > When I write emails with mutt, I generally write them in vim, so that > kills two birds with one stone. > How do you select different languages? Thanks for your interest. I remind you that the project page is at http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ There you will find the complete text for the policy, as well as some other info like the mail archive. As I told you before all sort of collaboration is highly welcome. Cheers, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 11:54:56 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:54:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] dict-common project announced in DWN Message-ID: <3D106300.8090807@aq.upm.es> Resending the same message for archival. I sent it wrongly to dict-common-cvs -------------------------------------------------------- Debian Weekly News http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/2002/23/ Debian Weekly News - June 18th, 2002 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Dictionaries Policy Proposal. Agustín Martín Domingo [38]announced a proposal for the "Debian Spelling Dictionaries and Tools Policy", as well as the new dictionaries-common package, which will provide the infrastructure to implement it. This is an announcement for all interested users and developers. The proposed system deals with ispell dictionaries and wordlist packages. Comments should be sent to [39]Agustín directly. 38. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-0205/msg02856.html 39. mailto:agmartin@aq.upm.es -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 13:15:25 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:15:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] News of the Debian dict-common project Message-ID: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Welcome to the latest news related to the dict-common project for Debian. This project has to do with policy and common support for ispell dictionaries and wordlists in Debian. First of all let you know that the project has been announced in June 18th, 2002 edition of Debian Weekly News. Regarding real news, we have very good news for this mail: - On the one hand, we are pleased to announce a further step in the dictionaries-common project: We now have at the sourceforge staging area ports to the new system of all ispell dictionaries and wordlists currently in Debian! - On the other hand, we have a nice latest new: policy now covers compatibility with pspell-ispell modules (as of 0.6.0). That means that e.g. abiword now works properly with the ispell dictionaries following this new policy. This means that we can make a full testing of the whole system to debug for major problems. So, please, test and test. It is our point of view that minor problems can be debugged in the official Debian repository after the transition has been carried out. This brings us to the need for a deadline. Our initial candidate for a deadline was the end of this month, but real life, work on integration of pspell support and building of the remaining packages has taken a bit more than expected. This has probably made this deadline too short. If we move the deadline to some week in July we have the problem that August is coming and that in that month many of us will be unavailable. So seems more reasonable to set the deadline in the first days of September unless you really want the transition to be done right now (that is, in a couple of weeks). In any case please let us know what do you think about this. One important thing: we are trying to do our best to keep in sync packages in the sourceforge staging area with packages in Debian unstable. But remember that both systems are no longer compatible, so please do not upload any old style ispell dictionary or wordlist packages to Debian in the meantime. That will confuse the transition. If you really have to do it, drop us an email first. That way the version in the Conflicts line of dictionaries-common can be changed in time and your new package will not break anything. A new policy package in sync with the official one (and a higher version) should then be put at the sourceforge staging area. Since the migration needs to be done in a highly coordinated way to have it done in the minimum possible period of time after the deadline, we need to know which are your plans with respect to it. Note that after the new ispell and dictionaries-common are uploaded to Debian all previous ispell dictionaries and wordlists will become uninstallable. So, please let us know what you do prefer. In any case, please contact us through the dict-common-dev mailing list, so we know you are not MIA. If you are still not subscribed to the dict-common-dev mailing list at sourceforge, that is the best way to get in touch with us and discuss the final details of the transition. Remember that the project page is at: http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ Your dictionaries-common team: Rafael Laboissière, David Coe, Agustín Martín Domingo -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From mikael.hedin@irf.se Wed Jun 19 18:56:25 2002 From: mikael.hedin@irf.se (Mikael Hedin) Date: 19 Jun 2002 19:56:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project In-Reply-To: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> Hi, I'd prefer the later deadline so I have time to test it myself. But I won't object if others more active prefer the early path. /Micce -- Mikael Hedin, MSc +46 (0)980 79176 Swedish Institute of Space Physics +46 (0)8 344979 (home) Box 812, S-981 28 KIRUNA, Sweden +46 (0)70 5891533 (mobile) [gpg key fingerprint = 387F A8DB DC2A 50E3 FE26 30C4 5793 29D3 C01B 2A22] From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 15:44:43 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:44:43 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> Message-ID: <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> Mikael Hedin wrote: > Hi, > > I'd prefer the later deadline so I have time to test it myself. But I > won't object if others more active prefer the early path. > Seems that nobody asked for an earlier transition, so we can start thinking on september. Since the aspell stuff that is being merged in the policy document is not as traumatic as the ispell and wordlists stuff, I hope this will not affect the transition. I will try to write a draft for a deadline announcement. Since I will participate a conference next week and will have a bad computer access, do not expect news from me about that until the other week. I would like to be able to send that mail in the middle of July, so everybody is aware of the deadline. Have a nice week, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 28 16:18:01 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:18:01 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project In-Reply-To: <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020628151801.GF3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-28 16:44]: > Seems that nobody asked for an earlier transition, so we can start > thinking on september. September sounds reasonable, but rather towards the end of the month. I will be incommunicado during the whole August. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 25 14:40:21 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:40:21 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <1024669030.545.41.camel@cuileann> <20020621150005.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1872C5.1030501@aq.upm.es> > * Alastair McKinstry [2002-06-21 16:19]: > > >>Fine. I'll join the dict-common-dev list. > Let us know when you subscribe to avoid ccing to you Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > This is a debatable issue, for sure. However, the Debian people tend to be > quite conservative and such a change will face a quite strong opposition, I > guess. I fully understand your point, but if the only benefit is template > searching, that is too few to have the change adopted. > > > > Again, I do not see any sensible benefit in changing the names of packages > now. This will only bring headaches. The situation may be different, > however, if somebody has a really strong argument for the name change. > Adding more to this, in a previous incarnation of the policy (that was never adopted) we used a more descriptive naming scheme, e.g, spell-ga would have been named idict-irish-gaelic, spell-gd idict-scottish-gaelic and so on. But we found strong opposition from maintainers who claimed that those changes would strongly confuse users that expect the classical names in Debian. Since after the dict-common system has been redesigned to its current shape the only real advantage of this naming scheme is that all ispell dicts appear together in dselect and friends (and the same with wordlists, using prefix 'words-') we found that to be a very little benefit compared to the opposition we found. So we finally decided to keep the old names. That also makes some things in the transition easier (there is no need to worry about old emacsen files provided by old-style packages, a package like 'miscfiles' can provide a wordlist without requiring package split and other issues). If at some time other reasons for a more descriptive name appear I would prefer something like we used (either with ispell- or idict- prefix) to the language locale name. This latter can even be more confusing, see e.g. the norwegian package, that provides ispell dicts for two written versions of norwegian, bokmal (with locale 'no') and nynorsk (with locale 'nn'). Using locales would not be as clear as inorwegian or idict-norwegian, as a matter of fact it would force package splitting. As Rafael told you, the system has currently tools to provide the same funcionallity as the locale naming scheme without using that scheme. Cheers, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:08:00 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:08:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages In-Reply-To: <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 11:55:52AM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > Great. Since the new Policy is still under discussion, and the transition > phase did not start yet, you should not upload your packages to unstable. > For that, we have a staging area at SourceForge. If you wish, we can add > you to the list of developers of the dict-common project, such that you can > upload your package there. Just tell us your SF user name. > please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username is, guess it, cavok. thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 14:34:03 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:34:03 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] cavoc added to the project (Was Re: FYI: New spell packages) References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username > is, guess it, cavok. > Done, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 15:39:10 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:39:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] cavoc added to the project (Was Re: FYI: New spell packages) In-Reply-To: <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020627143910.GC30171@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 03:34:03PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > > >please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username > >is, guess it, cavok. > > > Done, thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 26 15:55:51 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:55:51 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? Message-ID: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Peter, I am cc'ing you because of your ITA on aspell. Domenico already reads the dict-common-dev list. I made some minor changes in the pwli files section of the dict-common policy and thought about merging in that section the equivalent info and requirements for aspell dictionaries. I did a first draft for that and would like to know what the aspell people think about the draft itself and about including it in the dict-common policy document. Here goes the draft: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The pspell pwli files for ispell and aspell dictionaries All ispell and aspell dictionary packages must provide the corresponding pspell-ispell or pspell-aspell pwli file for each supplied dictionary. That pwli file must be installed at /usr/share/pspell and named as [-[][-]]-ispell.pwli for ispell dictionaries and [-[][-]]-aspell.pwli for aspell dictionaries, where is the two letter language code, is the particular spelling when the language has multiple spellings in different parts of the world such as English and is any extra informations to distinguish the hash from other ones with the same language and spelling. is always required while and not. If the spelling is left out but the jargon is not, there needs to be two dashes between the language and the jargon. For instance de--medical-ispell.pwli Each pwli file for a ispell dictionary contains exactly one line which contains the full path of the main ispell hash, white space, then the charset in the pspell way, e.g. iso8859-1, koi8-r. Currently allowed values are iso8859-1 to iso8859-15, koi8-r and cp1252. Each pwli file for an aspell wordlist should contain exactly one line which contains the full path of the main aspell wordlist. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Wed Jun 26 21:18:44 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 22:18:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:55:51 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: > Peter, I am cc'ing you because of your ITA on aspell. Domenico already > reads the dict-common-dev list. I've just subscribed to the list. > and requirements for aspell dictionaries. I did a first draft for that > and would like to know what the aspell people think about the draft > itself and about including it in the dict-common policy document. For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible about aspell in the dictionary-policy. -- Peter Makholm | Perhaps that late-night surfing is not such a peter@makholm.net | waste of time after all: it is just the web http://hacking.dk | dreaming | -- Tim Berners-Lee From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 09:40:12 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:40:12 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627084011.GV3424@laboiss0> * Peter Makholm [2002-06-26 22:18]: > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. I think everybody is for the inclusion. The problem is to find people willing to do the actual work. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 11:34:19 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:34:19 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > > I've just subscribed to the list. > Welcome > > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. > Many of such things should come from the aspell people. For instance aspell dicts naming scheme. I think that the widespread use is aspell-language_code. This implies that all variants for the same language should be provided in the same package. Since it is also desirable that the same ispell dict source be the aspell dict source the naming scheme should be extended to variants having different ispell sources, e.g., portuguese european and portuguese brazilian, coverint not only the language code but also a variant code. Unless you are thinking about a different naming scheme, what I doubt. I think we should currently add to the policy requirements all aspell dicts must have. At a later stage we might thing of some sort of helpers like those we have for ispell dicts and wordlists. Since aspell relies (unless otherwise stated in the config file) in the definition of variable LANGUAGE, seems that there is no need of all the debconf stuff for default selection. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:02:50 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:02:50 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 12:34:19PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > Many of such things should come from the aspell people. For instance > aspell dicts naming scheme. I think that the widespread use is > aspell-language_code. This implies that all variants for the same > language should be provided in the same package. Since it is also no, why should be this way? i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme aspell-[-whatever] so that a person looking for, say, portuguese he can search for aspell-pt. he can then find one or more packages which description is to be read. we cannot encode everything in the package name nor we want to include all the variants of a language in the same package. if i'm interested in it_IT maybe i'm not interested in it_CH. enforcing strict ownership of the variants to the same package is for sure inefficient. it is better to not be too picky here. > desirable that the same ispell dict source be the aspell dict source the i'm missing the point here > naming scheme should be extended to variants having different ispell > sources, e.g., portuguese european and portuguese brazilian, coverint > not only the language code but also a variant code. Unless you are > thinking about a different naming scheme, what I doubt. > indeed :) > I think we should currently add to the policy requirements all aspell > dicts must have. At a later stage we might thing of some sort of helpers i think that a naming scheme and the restriction on the pwli files would be sufficient. for instance, aspell-fr is completely broken. it doesn't provide a file named fr-aspell.pwli . i don't really know how it can work. instead aspell-de, provides de-aspell.pwli but also some other files like de_DE-40-aspell.pwli that do not seem very "pwli-compliant". this is maybe due to lack of the correct antries in regions-to-spelling.map, the upstream tryed (he succeeded for some strange coincidence) the fancy name. at the moment the lack of policy cannot make situation worse. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From peter@makholm.net Thu Jun 27 13:44:10 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:44:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> (cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it's message of "Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:02:50 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) writes: > i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still > able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme > aspell-[-whatever] For single dictionary packages this could be taken from the pwli-file. Would it be enough to use the -tag? The package providing the -aspell.pwli should be named aspell-. Other packages with multiple dictionaries could invent a tag for the package as a whole. -- Peter Makholm | 'Cause suicide is painless peter@makholm.net | It brings on many changes http://hacking.dk | And I can take or leave it if I please | -- Suicide is painless From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:48:44 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:48:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627134844.GA16128@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:44:10PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote: > cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) writes: > > > i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still > > able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme > > aspell-[-whatever] > > For single dictionary packages this could be taken from the > pwli-file. Would it be enough to use the -tag? > > The package providing the -aspell.pwli should be named > aspell-. > yes, it seems ok to me > Other packages with multiple dictionaries could invent a tag > for the package as a whole. > also here it is ok anyway i wouldn't force that every jargon/spelling stays in a separate package, nor that aspell- contains every jargon/spelling. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 15:56:26 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:56:26 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> * Domenico Andreoli [2002-06-27 15:02]: > i think that a naming scheme and the restriction on the pwli files would > be sufficient. > > for instance, aspell-fr is completely broken. it doesn't provide a file > named fr-aspell.pwli . i don't really know how it can work. We already added automatic generation of *-ispell.pwli files in dictionaries-common (version 0.6.2). This works apparently quite well and, in the future, we could extend the same thing to the aspell dictionaries. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 19:19:33 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:19:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > We already added automatic generation of *-ispell.pwli files in > dictionaries-common (version 0.6.2). This works apparently quite well and, > in the future, we could extend the same thing to the aspell dictionaries. > and may be also extend the work you did for autogeneration of the regions-to-spelling.map file to look both databases, aspell and ispell, aspell after a 'pspell-aspell' field containing only the pwli name stripped of '-aspell.pwli' and the Locale field. Some of the things should be much simpler than for ispell and wordlists. For instance after a quick glance, the equivalent to the update-ispell-default file for aspell would be a very simple eight lines script since no symlinks need to be set. Seems so simple that probably using slice to generate it from 'update-default.in' is much more work than installing from a separate file. Also an installdeb-aspell does not need anything about debconf, so it will be much simpler. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 28 15:53:40 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:53:40 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020628145340.GE3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-27 20:19]: > and may be also extend the work you did for autogeneration of the > regions-to-spelling.map file to look both databases, aspell and ispell, > aspell after a 'pspell-aspell' field containing only the pwli name > stripped of '-aspell.pwli' and the Locale field. > > Some of the things should be much simpler than for ispell and wordlists. > For instance after a quick glance, the equivalent to the > update-ispell-default file for aspell would be a very simple eight lines > script since no symlinks need to be set. Seems so simple that probably > using slice to generate it from 'update-default.in' is much more work > than installing from a separate file. > > Also an installdeb-aspell does not need anything about debconf, so it > will be much simpler. It seems that you have accumulated a quite large knowledge about aspell (larger than mine, anyway, which is almost inexistent). Once the specific needs for the aspell support are identified, I would gladly contribute with the implementation. If the sid version of dictionaries-common comes out with complete aspell support, that will be a big win. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 16:52:10 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:52:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> <20020628145340.GE3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1C862A.1050700@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > It seems that you have accumulated a quite large knowledge about aspell > (larger than mine, anyway, which is almost inexistent). My knowledge of aspell is more shallow than seems. As a matter of fact it has been this week (or the one before?) the first time I took a glance to the aspell manual. I was lucky and found easily the information I wanted. > Once the specific > needs for the aspell support are identified, I would gladly contribute with > the implementation. Wonderful, thanks. From what I have seen, since aspell does not set a default the way ispell or wordlists do, things should be much simpler, dealing only with policy issues, regions-to-spelling.map regeneration and may be the use of a debhelper like helper. But I still need to think more on all this. > > If the sid version of dictionaries-common comes out with complete aspell > support, that will be a big win. > Or at least with a set of things all aspell dict packages must fit. I think this should be our first priority with respect to aspell. What a complete support is depends on what Peter and Domenico think about that. There are some questions for them: - ispell packages must provide an 'info-file' that is stored in a perl database. Their values are retrieved for selection of default dictionary (not needed for aspell), generation of emacsen+jed+mutt support and automatic rebuilding of the pspell regions-to-spelling.map file. When the installdeb-ispell helper is used when building the package this file is also used for building and installing a pwli file and the helper also adds the corresponding debhelper snippet to update the perl database once the package is installed or removed. ¿Would it worth a similar scheme for aspell dicts? I think this would help automating building of the regions-to-spelling.map file. The use of the debhelper like build helper is also useful. - I really have no idea about how can aspell be used under emacs and how it will interact with the redefinition of the menus we do. Any hint? -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 13:06:41 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:06:41 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. > Some additions from my working copy: At the top of the policy document: Warning Some aspell elements are being slowly included in the policy document. However, this is by far not complete, and the general sections most probably will not apply to aspell. Trust only the aspell specific references. and at the 'Installation Directories and Symlinks' section: Aspell dictionary hashed files and, if exist, 'multi' files, must be placed in directory /usr/lib/aspell/. Aspell language data files and if exists, soundslike data file must be placed in directory /usr/share/aspell/. Please refer to the aspell documentation for details about these files. Will commit soon if there are no objections on them. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Thu Jun 27 13:39:58 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:39:58 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:06:41 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: > Some additions from my working copy: Another addition: At the 'Relationships' section: - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package 'aspell-dictionary' -- Peter Makholm | Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your peter@makholm.net | pants and slide on the ice http://hacking.dk | -- Sidney Freedman From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:55:15 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:55:15 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627135515.GB16128@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:39:58PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote: > Agust?n Mart?n Domingo writes: > > > Some additions from my working copy: > > Another addition: > > At the 'Relationships' section: > > - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package > 'aspell-dictionary' > seconded -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 16:57:04 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:57:04 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > Another addition: > > At the 'Relationships' section: > > - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package > 'aspell-dictionary' > Just one comment, why 'should' instead of something stronger? -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Fri Jun 28 18:57:22 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 19:57:22 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:57:04 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87y9czqoal.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: >> At the 'Relationships' section: >> - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual >> package >> 'aspell-dictionary' >> > Just one comment, why 'should' instead of something stronger? Only because that what is used for the requirements of the 'ispell-dictionary' and 'wordlist' virtual packages. -- Peter Makholm | First you fall in love with Antarctica, and then it peter@makholm.net | breaks you heart. And if Antartcica doesn't do it http://hacking.dk | Valerie Kenning might | -- Antarctica From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 21 10:55:52 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:55:52 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages In-Reply-To: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> Message-ID: <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> [ N.B. : I am Cc:ing this reply to the dict-common-dev mailing list. I am quoting your msg and I hope that you will not mind.] * Alastair McKinstry [2002-06-21 10:39]: > I am the upstream maintainer of three ispell packages: > spell-ga (Irish / "Gaelic" ), currently 0.9.3 > spell-gd (Scots Gaelic / "Gaidhglig" ) currently 0.3 > spell-gv (Manx Gaelic / "Gaelg" ) currently 0.3 > > These packages are present in Mandrake; I am a debian New Maintainer > and have recently packaged spell-ga for Debian (its in Sid). I am > currently packaging spell-gd, spell-gv for Sid. > > The source package "spell-ga" produces the ispell package ispell-ga. > I intend to make it conform to Debian standards, renaming ispell-ga to > iirish-1.0, and have spell-ga also produce wirish-1.0. Also, > spell-gd will give the binary packages igaelic-0.5 and wgaelic-0.5, > spell-gv giving imanx-0.5 and wmanx-0.5. > > These packages will conform to the new policy. Great. Since the new Policy is still under discussion, and the transition phase did not start yet, you should not upload your packages to unstable. For that, we have a staging area at SourceForge. If you wish, we can add you to the list of developers of the dict-common project, such that you can upload your package there. Just tell us your SF user name. > (The Mandrake RPM names for the packages make it possible to > check for the existence of a spell check package for a given language > using the template "spell-$langcode". I believe that we should name the > debian ispell packages this way, so they can be autoinstalled easily > later, but thats a debate for another day ?). This is a debatable issue, for sure. However, the Debian people tend to be quite conservative and such a change will face a quite strong opposition, I guess. I fully understand your point, but if the only benefit is template searching, that is too few to have the change adopted. -- Rafael From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Tue Jun 4 14:42:34 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 15:42:34 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 12:32:09PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > >i just uploaded a version of pspell-ispell package, for which i need > >some collaboration from ispell dictionary packages....=20 >=20 > Can you give us more details? We may need to add something to the policy= =20 > document about that. >=20 this module needs to know the charmap used somewhere in the wordlist. this info was used to be taken from a pspell-ispell maintainer provided list. for obvious reason it should be provided by the dictionary maintainer. i see the new policy talks also about this in the info file provided by new policy compliant dictionary packages. anyway it is optional while pspell-ispell requires it. what about mandating it? what about a update-ispell build also the pspell-ispell required configuration files with the provided charmap? regards ps: i just RFAed pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and gaspell -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE8/MPKBneQM6IOvFARAhELAJ9ig9vrW2ck6qtL0JNpAsrkZuDEUQCgmPxs IuIw93FYYP1JXc+9dP0CFt8= =vCVi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gBBFr7Ir9EOA20Yy-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 5 13:21:53 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:21:53 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: >> > > this module needs to know the charmap used somewhere in the wordlist. I guess here wordlist stands for ispell dict > > this info was used to be taken from a pspell-ispell maintainer provided > list. for obvious reason it should be provided by the dictionary > maintainer. > > i see the new policy talks also about this in the info file provided > by new policy compliant dictionary packages. anyway it is optional > while pspell-ispell requires it. what about mandating it? what about > a update-ispell build also the pspell-ispell required configuration > files with the provided charmap? > Using only that "Coding-System" field is not that straighforward. On the one hand is needed more info than the contents of this field, since also the two characters name of the language is required, as in the british line of make-ispell-pwli british: en-british iso8859-1 On the other hand, the "Coding-System" field of the info file is intended for emacs ispell.el, who currently allows only iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2 and koi8-r charsets. As a matter of fact I am not sure of the role of this field in ispell.el, since I can spellcheck esperanto latin3 texts with emacs, even if the entry for it is put as iso-8859-1 (It did not allow me to put iso-8859-3). That means that putting other values in that field will make ispell.el fail. Having such low number of possibilities is probably a bug in ispell.el I see three possibilities: (a) Adding a new field named for instance 'pspell-pwli' and rebuild the pwli files from it. Not all entries should have this field, for instance for spanish there are two emacs entries castellano and castellano8, but only the first would have that entry. (b) Add some lines in policy telling that ispell dicts maintainers must look at a global file where all pwli entries are and verify if there are proper entries for their ispell dictionaries. In that case update-default-ispell should check for make-ispell-pwli existence and run it if present. (c) Add to policy that ispell packages have to provide such file for each dictionary in the package. I think this is what aspell dictionary packages do and put the responsability about this on maintainers rather than in a common support. One comment, I see that make-ispell-pwli is in /usr/share/pspell and that the generated pwli files are generated in that directory. Is that policy compliant? I assume that normal location for such autogenerated files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that this would not be a problem in case of (c). My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, but I would like to know other points of view. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 5 14:25:00 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 15:25:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:21:53PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > I guess here wordlist stands for ispell dict yes > Using only that "Coding-System" field is not that straighforward. > > On the one hand is needed more info than the contents of this field, > since also the two characters name of the language is required, as in > the british line of make-ispell-pwli > > british: en-british iso8859-1 > right. i forgot it because it is encoded in the name of the pwli file > One comment, I see that make-ispell-pwli is in /usr/share/pspell and > that the generated pwli files are generated in that directory. Is that > policy compliant? I assume that normal location for such autogenerated no, it isn't policy compliant :( #144883 i was thinking at something like update-pspell-ispell-pwli. once i wrote update-pspell-ispell-pwli i understood that your c) was my best way. and though to send a "couple" of bug reports to ispell dictionary packages (bug reports that i never sent). pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file is required. > files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that > this would not be a problem in case of (c). > indeed :) > My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, > but I would like to know other points of view. > seconded. this would suffices for the needs of pspell-ispell. > Cheers, > :) > Agustin domenico -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 13:10:33 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 14:10:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is > completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file > is required. > So old pwli are no longer removed. That is good, although may leave some files behind. Otherwise pwli files provided by the ispell dicts and not in the make-ispell-pwli file would have been removed each time pspell-ispell is installed. > >>files is under the /var hierarchy, but may be I am wrong. Note that >>this would not be a problem in case of (c). >> > > indeed :) > > >>My personal preference is somewhat towards (c), since I find it simpler, >>but I would like to know other points of view. >> > > seconded. this would suffices for the needs of pspell-ispell. > > Something like this may fit (partially borrowed from pspell-ispell README): ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The pspell-ispell pwli file for ispell dictionaries: All ispell dictionary packages must provide the corresponding pspell-ispell pwli file for each supplied ispell dictionary. That pwli file must be installed at /usr/share/pspell and named as [-[][-]]-ispell.pwli where is the two letter language code, is the particular spelling when the language has multiple spellings in different parts of the world such as English and is any extra informations to distinguish the hash from other ones with the same language and spelling. is always required while and not. Each pwli file contains exactly one line which contains the full path of the main ispell hash, white space, then the charset, e.g. iso8859-1, koi8-r. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 6 14:25:33 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 15:25:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 02:10:33PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > > > pspell-ispell 0.12-6 hasn't make-ispell-pwli anymore. indeed it is > > completely broken, since no ispell dictionaries know that a pwli file > > is required. > > > > So old pwli are no longer removed. That is good, although may leave some > files behind. Otherwise pwli files provided by the ispell dicts and not > in the make-ispell-pwli file would have been removed each time > pspell-ispell is installed. > hmm.. indeed these files are not owned by pspell-ispell anymore, then can be well written by the ispell dictionary packages.. good, it is a better solution than what i have though about it :) > Something like this may fit (partially borrowed from pspell-ispell README): > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The pspell-ispell pwli file for ispell dictionaries: > ... > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > yes, i think it is appropriate :) thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 6 16:04:41 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 17:04:41 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> Hi Agustín and Domenico, Sorry for being silent on to the present thread. I think that you both reach consensus about how to handle pspell-ispell support. From the little that I saw, I think that it is straightforward to add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed for the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. The location for the automatically generated file must be under the /var hierachy, as Agustín have already pointed out. A question to Domenico: is it easy to change the pkgdatadir of pspell to, say, /var/cache/dictionaries-common/? In order to implement this idea, I will try to hack the installation script of dictionaries-common as soon as I have some free time (may take a while, though, since I am busy right now). Once the pspell feature is added, we will have to update in the Policy document and to rebuild of all the dictionay packages in the staging area. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 16:55:06 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 17:55:06 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > Hi Agustín and Domenico, > > Sorry for being silent on to the present thread. > > I think that you both reach consensus about how to handle pspell-ispell > support. From the little that I saw, I think that it is straightforward to > add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín > suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package > maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the > debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed for > the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and > "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. > > The location for the automatically generated file must be under the /var > hierachy, as Agustín have already pointed out. A question to Domenico: is > it easy to change the pkgdatadir of pspell to, say, > /var/cache/dictionaries-common/? > The other possibility we were talking about is simply telling mantainers to add the required pwli files for each hash in the ispell dictionary package itself, not recreated from the info-ispell file. As a matter of fact if each ispell package provides the proper files at /usr/share/pspell there is no need to recreate anything, and thus the location would still be valid. By the way, that is also the location where aspell dicts put their pwli files, and they are 'real' package files, no autogenerated ones. I think this other possibility is much simpler and straighforward, requiring only a minor change in policy and of course rebuilding the dictionaries. From my point of view, recreating everything each time a new dictionary is added is an unnecesary extra complexity. If we can in addition make things easier adding to installdeb-ispell the possibility to install such pwli files automatically, better, but we must keep in mind that each single package can install more that one hash (see e.g. inorwegian), and so may need more than one pwli file. > In order to implement this idea, I will try to hack the installation script > of dictionaries-common as soon as I have some free time (may take a while, > though, since I am busy right now). Once the pspell feature is added, we > will have to update in the Policy document and to rebuild of all the > dictionay packages in the staging area. > I would not touch the installation scripts for this, but think about a good way to make installdeb-ispell more clever about this. This could be done using a new field in the info-ispell file, but used to automatically generate and install the pwli files during package build, not during package install. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 6 17:44:39 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:44:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: >> add pspell support to the dictionaries-common package. As Agustín >> suggested, we should just require that the Ispell dictionary package >> maintainers add an extra "Pspell" (or whatever) field to the >> debian/info-ispell that would contain the part of the file name needed >> for >> the file /path/to/-ispell.pwli. Using the "Hash-Name" and >> "Coding-System" fields, the contents of that file are easily determined. I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the "Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason why I prefer the other system. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 10:55:59 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 11:55:59 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 18:44]: > I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only > iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs > entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the > "Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason > why I prefer the other system. I do not think that this is a problem. I can easily modify the build_emacsen_support subroutine in DictionariesCommon.pm, such that no emacsen entry is created when the "Coding-System" field differs from one of the three above. What do you think? -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 7 12:10:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 13:10:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 18:44]: > > >>I forgot to add one thing here, ispell.el currently allows only >>iso-8859-1, iso-8859-2, and koi8-r as values in the ispell.el emacs >>entries, otherwise will fail. So it is not possible to use the >>"Coding-System" field unless we patch ispell.el. This is another reason >>why I prefer the other system. > > > I do not think that this is a problem. I can easily modify the > build_emacsen_support subroutine in DictionariesCommon.pm, such that no > emacsen entry is created when the "Coding-System" field differs from one of > the three above. What do you think? > No entry also does not work, you need to put exactly one of those entries, otherwise will fail too, (debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry '("american" "[A-Za-z]" "[^A-Za-z]" "[']" nil ("-B") nil nil) "american") will give an error set-variable: Value `(("american" "[A-Za-z]" ... does not match type repeat of ispell-dictionary-alist as well as putting iso8859-1. This latter may also be a problem for the pspell entries, which use iso8859-1 instead of iso-8859-1. Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Otherwise we can always use something like a 'Pspell-ispell:' two elements field in the info file: Pspell-ispell:sv iso8859-1 without any sort of mapping. From the other message: > > Okay, I buy your arguments and also think that changing installdeb-ispell is > the way to go. There will be no problems with multiple hashes, since the > Perl code in installdeb-ispell can parse the multiple definitions in the > ispell-info file. I will try to take a look at the implementation. I was also looking at the installdeb-in source and seems not difficult to make it behave as we want, as a matter of fact it already parses the info file for testing its presence. One more thing we should also consider when doing that, two different info-ispell definitions can correspond to a unique hash (e.g. castellano and castellano8) giving different emacs entries, so one possibility os to allow some definitions not having a pspell field. Although this is probably not a problem if there are pspell fields in the two entries, since the later pspell-ispell file will overwrite the previous one with the same info. Cheers Agustin, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 7 17:25:14 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 18:25:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3D00DE6A.1060506@aq.upm.es> Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > > as well as putting iso8859-1. This latter may also be a problem for the > pspell entries, which use iso8859-1 instead of iso-8859-1. > > Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as > iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for > pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Is that one the list of the charmaps provided by libpspell4? cp1252.map iso8859-1.map iso8859-10.map iso8859-13.map iso8859-14.map iso8859-15.map iso8859-2.map iso8859-3.map iso8859-4.map iso8859-5.map iso8859-6.map iso8859-7.map iso8859-8.map iso8859-9.map koi8-r.map There are some other files, this is obviously not a charmap: region-to-spelling.map and I have no idea about this one: viscii.map -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 17:52:30 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 18:52:30 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> References: <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> <3CFF9177.3060105@aq.upm.es> <20020607095559.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0094AE.8090806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607165230.GW3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-07 13:10]: > No entry also does not work, you need to put exactly one of those > entries, otherwise will fail too, > > (debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry > '("american" > "[A-Za-z]" > "[^A-Za-z]" > "[']" > nil > ("-B") > nil > nil) > "american") > > will give an error > > [...] Sorry, I was not very clear. My proposal was to test if "Coding-System" is one of the allowed ones and, if not, then suppress the whole debian-ispell-add-dictionary-entry for that dictionary. > Domenico, how critical is for pspell-ispell naming the charset as > iso8859-1 or iso-8859-1?. Do we have a list of allowed charset names for > pspell-ispell to try some mapping? Otherwise we can always use something > like a 'Pspell-ispell:' two elements field in the info file: > > Pspell-ispell:sv iso8859-1 > > without any sort of mapping. That is a better way to cope with the issue because, at any rate, the maintainer will have to supply the parts of the name of the pwli file. > One more thing we should also consider when doing that, two different > info-ispell definitions can correspond to a unique hash (e.g. castellano > and castellano8) giving different emacs entries, so one possibility os > to allow some definitions not having a pspell field. Although this is > probably not a problem if there are pspell fields in the two entries, > since the later pspell-ispell file will overwrite the previous one with > the same info. Right. If we adopt the "Pspell-ispell" field as above, then the problem disappears. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 7 10:51:18 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 11:51:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common In-Reply-To: <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> References: <20020529084356.GB14958@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CF4AE29.7050706@aq.upm.es> <20020604134234.GA14349@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFE0261.2000101@aq.upm.es> <20020605132500.GB28433@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3CFF5139.7040803@aq.upm.es> <20020606132533.GA19255@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020606150441.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3CFF85DA.2080905@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020607095118.GT3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-06 17:55]: > The other possibility we were talking about is simply telling mantainers > to add the required pwli files for each hash in the ispell dictionary > package itself, not recreated from the info-ispell file. As a matter of > fact if each ispell package provides the proper files at > /usr/share/pspell there is no need to recreate anything, and thus the > location would still be valid. By the way, that is also the location > where aspell dicts put their pwli files, and they are 'real'package > files, no autogenerated ones. > > I think this other possibility is much simpler and straighforward, > requiring only a minor change in policy and of course rebuilding the > dictionaries. From my point of view, recreating everything each time a > new dictionary is added is an unnecesary extra complexity. I think that both implementations have comparable complexity. The advantage of changing installdeb-ispell to include the pwli files in the binary package is that we keep the usual directory for libpspell. > If we can in addition make things easier adding to installdeb-ispell the > possibility to install such pwli files automatically, better, but we > must keep in mind that each single package can install more that one > hash (see e.g. inorwegian), and so may need more than one pwli file. > > I would not touch the installation scripts for this, but think about a > good way to make installdeb-ispell more clever about this. This could > be done using a new field in the info-ispell file, but used to > automatically generate and install the pwli files during package build, > not during package install. Okay, I buy your arguments and also think that changing installdeb-ispell is the way to go. There will be no problems with multiple hashes, since the Perl code in installdeb-ispell can parse the multiple definitions in the ispell-info file. I will try to take a look at the implementation. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Sat Jun 8 19:57:09 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 20:57:09 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files Message-ID: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the versioned library package.) I also uploaded a modified ibrazilian package to the staging. I just added the line: Pspell-Ispell: pt-brazilian iso8859-1 to the debian/info-ispell file. After installation, I have: $ cat /usr/share/pspell/pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli /usr/lib/ispell/brasileiro.hash iso8859-1 Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. -- Rafael --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=pspell-patch Index: debian/control =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/dict-common/dictionaries-common/debian/control,v retrieving revision 1.48 diff -u -r1.48 control --- debian/control 7 Jun 2002 11:14:54 -0000 1.48 +++ debian/control 8 Jun 2002 18:48:34 -0000 @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Package: dictionaries-common-dev Architecture: all -Depends: debhelper (>> 2.0.89), dictionaries-common (>> 0.3.6) +Depends: debhelper (>> 2.0.89), dictionaries-common (>> 0.3.6), libpspell4 Description: Common utilities and Policy for spelling dictionary tools WARNING: THIS PACKAGE IS ALPHA SOFTWARE! . Index: scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/dict-common/dictionaries-common/scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.4 installdeb.in --- scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in 28 Nov 2001 20:27:02 -0000 1.4 +++ scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in 8 Jun 2002 18:48:34 -0000 @@ -39,15 +39,34 @@ doit ("install", "-d", $lib_dir); doit ("install", "-m644", $infofile, "$lib_dir/$package"); + # Install the Pspell .pwli files for each dictionary found in the + # info file. This is only done for the ispell dictionary + # installation. + if ($class eq "ispell") { + my $pspell_dir = tmpdir ($package) . `pspell-config pkgdatadir`; + chomp $pspell_dir; + foreach my $d (keys %{$dicts}) { + if (exists $dicts->{$d}->{'pspell-ispell'}) { + my ($name, $charcod) = split (/\s+/, $dicts->{$d}->{"pspell-ispell"}); + doit ("install", "-d", $pspell_dir) + if (not -d $pspell_dir); + open (PWLI, "> $pspell_dir/$name-ispell.pwli"); + print PWLI + "/usr/lib/ispell/$dicts->{$d}->{'hash-name'}.hash $charcod\n"; + close PWLI; + } + } + } + # Generate the config file. First, test if # debian/[package.]config exists and trigger an error if it is the # case. --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP-- From Rafael Laboissiere Sun Jun 9 12:10:51 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 13:10:51 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020609111051.GA3424@laboiss0> * Rafael Laboissiere [2002-06-08 20:57]: > Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am > sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. Just to complement my message: I tested libpspell with my updated ibrazilian package (containing the pwli file) by compiling and running the example program /usr/share/doc/libpspell-dev/examples/example-c.c.gz. It works fine: $ cc example-c.c -o example-c -lpspell $ ./example-c pt Using: pt-brazilian--ispell Type "h"for help. c casa correct -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 10 15:06:56 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:06:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in > installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and > scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. Wonderful, thanks > > The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, > because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much > better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the > versioned library package.) I also have to add a conflicts with pspell-ispell lower than that in unstable. Otherwise the old pwli creation script will remove pwli entries and will not regenerate them for ispell dicts not having an entry in make-ispell-pwli. This means I will also upload to the staging area the pspell-ispell debs from unstable, so people running woody can check this system. > (BTW, a much better place for this script would be the libspell-dev > package, and not the versioned library package.) Domenico, what do you think? > > I also uploaded a modified ibrazilian package to the staging. I just added > the line: > > Pspell-Ispell: pt-brazilian iso8859-1 > > to the debian/info-ispell file. After installation, I have: > > $ cat /usr/share/pspell/pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli > /usr/lib/ispell/brasileiro.hash iso8859-1 > > Please, check my changes. This has been a 30 minutes quick hack, and I am > sure that there are bugs and room for improvement. I have tested them for the hungarian dict and everything works like a charm. It looks O.K.. The only posssible change I see is putting it under 'slice' control, so it is ignored for installdeb-wordlist. I have modified the policy document in my local copy to take care of the pspell-ispell stuff. I will commit all that this afternoon. I think the pspell-ispell adition deserves bumping the version to 0.6.0. I have nearly ready packages for swedish and hungarian that will be uploaded soon. Once they are uploaded and all other ispell dicts are rebuilt for pspell-ispell compatibility we will have ports for all dicts in unstable to the new system. I do not know when I will have time to write a draft for a new circular to IDWP maintainers, may be tomorrow, and surely not today. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 10 23:50:10 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 00:50:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> <3D04B280.5030405@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020610225010.GW3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-10 16:06]: > I have tested them for the hungarian dict and everything works like a > charm. It looks O.K.. The only posssible change I see is putting it > under 'slice' control, so it is ignored for installdeb-wordlist. Actually, it is already "under slice control", because the code does not get executed in installdeb-wordlist (it checks the $class variable). I will eventually adopt your suggestion, since the $class variable was not created with that intent. > I have modified the policy document in my local copy to take care of > the pspell-ispell stuff. I will commit all that this afternoon. I think the > pspell-ispell adition deserves bumping the version to 0.6.0. Sure. -- Rafael From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:13:39 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:13:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 08:57:09PM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > I just implemented the automatic generation of pwli files in > installdeb-ispell. The patch to the debian/control and > scripts/debhelper/installdeb.in is attached below for your appreciation. > > The dictionaries-common-dev package has now a dependency on libpspell4, > because installdeb-ispell calls the pspell-config script. (BTW, a much > better place for this script would be the libspell-dev package, and not the > versioned library package.) > eh... so you think that destination dir should be decided at build time? hm.. yes, it much better... i was forced to put in libpspell4 because it was called on every dictionary install and then it was not acceptable to make dictionaries depend on libpspell-dev. not things are changed. i need to make a new release of pspell, could i have access to the stage area? thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 16:00:20 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 17:00:20 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for pwli files In-Reply-To: <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <20020608185709.GY3424@laboiss0> <20020627131339.GC16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020627150020.GX3424@laboiss0> * Domenico Andreoli [2002-06-27 15:13]: > i need to make a new release of pspell, could i have access to the stage > area? If your new release will not break anything in unstable, you do not really need the staging area. Otherwise, since you are now a member of the dict-common project, just cvs chekout the www module and you will find there a script called sf-dictrelease, which you should use for uploading packages to the staging area. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 11 14:37:05 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:37:05 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Problems with the sourceforge server Message-ID: <3D05FD01.50103@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Seems that sourceforge has changed its server yesterday. That is producing some problems, since now when uploading a new dict package to sourceforge, I get the error chmod: changing permissions of `/home/groups/d/di/dict-common/htdocs/testing/sources/iportuguese_19980611-8.diff.gz': Operation not permitted for all files at the staging area not owned by the uploader (me). The package itself is uploaded (with g=r not g=rw), but the Packages and Sources files are not recreated and no mail is sent because of the previous error. Seems that the new server does not like chmod -R g=u $www_dir for files not owned by the person doing the upload. I have changed things to something like PKGFILES=`cat $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.list | sed 's:\.\/:\ :g' | tr -s \n' ' '` # previous command in one line ( cd $www_dir && chmod g=u $PKGFILES ) and seems to work. Currently I changed things only in my experimental uploader 'ureleasedeb', a more general version of 'sf-dictrelease', so 'sf-dicrelease' is still broken. I hope to test this more extensively and then port changes to 'sf-dictrelease'. Of course any other suggestion is welcome. In the meantime do not surprise too much if you find the same error. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 11 16:59:30 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 17:59:30 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Problems with the sourceforge server References: <3D05FD01.50103@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <3D061E62.60202@aq.upm.es> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000605000503010304070300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Agust=EDn Mart=EDn Domingo wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > Seems that sourceforge has changed its server yesterday. That is=20 > producing some problems, since now when uploading a new dict package to= =20 > sourceforge, I get the error >=20 > chmod: changing permissions of=20 > `/home/groups/d/di/dict-common/htdocs/testing/sources/iportuguese_19980= 611-8.diff.gz':=20 > Operation not permitted >=20 > for all files at the staging area not owned by the uploader (me). >=20 > The package itself is uploaded (with g=3Dr not g=3Drw), but the Package= s and=20 > Sources files are not recreated and no mail is sent because of the=20 > previous error. >=20 > Seems that the new server does not like >=20 > chmod -R g=3Du $www_dir Changed also in sf-dictrelease in CVS. For those curious, attached is=20 the patch against previous sf-dictrelease Cheers, Agustin --=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html --------------000605000503010304070300 Content-Type: text/plain; name="patch.sf-dictrelease" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="patch.sf-dictrelease" --- sf-dictrelease.orig Tue Jun 11 17:50:20 2002 +++ sf-dictrelease Tue Jun 11 17:55:28 2002 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ #! /bin/bash -# $Id: sf-dictrelease,v 1.15 2002/06/04 12:06:45 agmartin Exp $ +# $Id: sf-dictrelease,v 1.16 2002/06/11 15:55:28 agmartin Exp $ # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # sf-dictrelease: A script that will make a local release of a package # First intended to release a dictionary to the sourceforge stage area @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@ make_controldata create_info_file > $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.info ( cd $DESTDIR && tar -cvzf ../${TARBALL} . ) + PKGFILES=`cat $CONTROLDIR/${PACKAGE}.list | tr -s '\n' ' '` } install_sources(){ @@ -267,7 +268,8 @@ $rcp_command ../${TARBALL} $www_dir_remote $rsh_command "tar xzf $www_dir/${TARBALL} -C $www_dir; rm -f $www_dir/${TARBALL}" if [ "$REMOTE" == "yes" ]; then - $rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; chmod -R g=u $www_dir" + #$rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; chmod -R g=u $www_dir" + $rsh_command "chgrp -R $www_group $www_dir; ( cd $www_dir && chmod g=u $PKGFILES )" fi ) } --------------000605000503010304070300-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 14 11:24:07 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:24:07 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? Message-ID: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> Hi all, We currently have at the sourceforge staging area ports of dictionaries and wordlists for all such packages in Debian. Since we have tested the system for major bugs for a while I think it is time to consider whether we are ready for migration, and if we are, set a deadline for all the final tests before the migration is done. For that I would like to know whether you also find the new policy system mature enough, and what is your point of view about the transition. I have written a first draft for notification of a deadline to IDWP maintainers and put it at the sourceforge CVS at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/dict-common/www/staging-area/ANNOUNCE.pre-final This document still needs some work, but I would prefer not leaving things dormant a long time. There are some things that need to be decided: - Is the system mature enough? - Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. - How transition will be carried out. What do you think about all this? Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 15:59:23 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 16:59:23 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 12:24]: > - Is the system mature enough? Yes, I think so. Even if it may not be complete (is it worthwhile to include aspell support? what about abiword?), I think that the existing support (debconf, emacsen, jed, mutt) is mature enough. > - Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of > people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to > July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. I will be completely unavailable during August. Hopefully, if the announcement happens before the Summer, it will not come too late in July. > - How transition will be carried out. I think that your proposal in ANNOUNCE.pre-final. We have just to make sure that the IDWP mainainer feel themselves comfortable with the new system. -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 17:13:39 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 18:13:39 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> Replying to my own message: * Rafael Laboissiere [2002-06-14 16:59]: > Yes, I think so. Even if it may not be complete (is it worthwhile to > include aspell support? what about abiword?), [...] I just checked the AbiWord situation. The AbiWord executable (from the abiword-gtk package, I did not check the abiword-gnome package) is linked against libpspell4. This means that just by introducing Pspell support in dictionaries-common, we got AbiWord support for free, at least for dictionaries providing pwli files. Indeed, if I launch: $ LANGUAGE=fr abiword the correct spelling language "French (France)" is selected (because the ifrench package has the file /usr/share/pspell/fr-ispell.pwli). However, I do not know how to select language variants (like pt_BR and pt_PT). Of course, I can launch either: $ LANGUAGE=pt_PT abiword or: $ LANGUAGE=pt_BR abiword and the correct language will be selected [viz. "Portuguese (Portugal)" or "Portuguese "(Brazil)"], but the selected pwli file seems to be always pt-european-ispell.pwli. Indeed, I cannot see how abiword could translate the language variant identification "PT" or "BR" into viz. "pt-european-ispell.pwli" or "pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli". Any clue? -- Rafael From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 19:42:40 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:42:40 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D0A344B.6080704@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> <3D0A344B.6080704@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614184240.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 20:22]: > More amazing, that seems to work for english both for aspell and ispell > > LANGUAGE=en_US abiword > > complaints about 'colour' and 'behaviour' and accepts 'color' and > 'behavior' while > > LANGUAGE=en_UK abiword > > just do the opposite. This only work for aspell. If I completely remove aspell and libaspell from my system and launch $ LANGUAGE=en_UK abiword it accepts çolor'and refuses 'colour'. I guess that abiword first try to use aspell, and only resort to libpspell as a fallback. I guess that this problem will be quite hard to fix. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 14 19:44:18 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 20:44:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > However, I do not know how to select language variants (like pt_BR and > pt_PT). Of course, I can launch either: > > $ LANGUAGE=pt_PT abiword > > or: > > $ LANGUAGE=pt_BR abiword > > and the correct language will be selected [viz. "Portuguese (Portugal)" or > "Portuguese "(Brazil)"], but the selected pwli file seems to be always > pt-european-ispell.pwli. Indeed, I cannot see how abiword could translate > the language variant identification "PT" or "BR" into viz. > "pt-european-ispell.pwli" or "pt-brazilian-ispell.pwli". > > Any clue? > Good news!! Just after sending to you the previous message I tried to grep the pspell sources and I think I got it. The key is the /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map file, belonging to the libpspell4 package. It currently has only $ cat /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map # Pspell region to spelling map file # NOTE: language codes are in all lowercase en_us american en_gb british en_ca canadian That is why I succeded with both british and american. Adding pt_br brazilian pt_pt portuguese to that file, things do work as expected. Kepping the words astronomicamente antenupcial marked and toggling language between portuguese and brazilian in the pop-up menu the wrong word toggles too. Probably this worths a wish to upstream. With respect to us, pspell can put a Debian specific file with entries for all ispell dicts known in Debian (they will surely work for aspell too), or we can handle that diverting that file, but it is simpler from the libpspell4 package. Have a nice weekend, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 14 20:06:18 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 21:06:18 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? In-Reply-To: <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> <20020614161339.GS3424@laboiss0> <3D0A3982.60608@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020614190618.GV3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-14 20:44]: > The key is the /usr/share/pspell/region-to-spelling.map file, belonging > to the libpspell4 package. It currently has only You are a genious. It works, thanks. Forget about my previous message. However: > pt_br brazilian > pt_pt portuguese This should be rather: pt_br brazilian pt_pt european > Probably this worths a wish to upstream. With respect to us, pspell can > put a Debian specific file with entries for all ispell dicts known in > Debian (they will surely work for aspell too), or we can handle that > diverting that file, but it is simpler from the libpspell4 package. We might indeed add support for adding items to that file in dictionaries-common, but I am not sure about what is better to do. First of all, the region-to-spelling.map file must change its location to be either under /etc or /var. Also, we need to add a new field to the ispell-info file (for instance, "Locale"). Using this information, it would be easy to modifiy the relevant line when installing the package and to delete the said line when the package is removed. On the other hand, we might ask to the maintainer of libspell to just change the upstream file and add all the necessary entries for all dictionaries present in Debian. The drawback of this method is that individual IDWP maintainers will loose control on pspell behavior, and there will be a burden upon libpspell maintainer's shoulders. A third possibility will be to have dictionaries-common diverting the file, but the drawback mentioned above will remains. > Have a nice weekend, You two, and good look for Spain against Ireland! -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 09:57:14 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:57:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Are we ready or dict-common migration? References: <3D09C447.3030806@aq.upm.es> <20020614145923.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DA46A.4080800@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote:> > > >>- Setting a deadline. For this we need to know time availability of >> people. I will be at a Conference in Poland from June 30th to >> July 07th, but after that I will be available until about July 20th. > > > I will be completely unavailable during August. Hopefully, if the > announcement happens before the Summer, it will not come too late in July. > I would have preferred doing things before summer, but I cannot avoid fearing any unexpected problem in the middle of August when none of us can take care of it. I have no idea about the availability of David, Roland and the other IDWP maintainers, but considering the amount of people involved I would find strange if we can do the whole transition and still have a reasonable period of time to watch the behavior of the packages before August comes. > >>- How transition will be carried out. > > > I think that your proposal in ANNOUNCE.pre-final. We have just to make sure > that the IDWP mainainer feel themselves comfortable with the new system. > That is another thing. I do not know how maintainers would feel with a two or three weeks deadline. For some of them is probably a very short period of time. I plan to rewrite the message to a 'dict-common news' covering the last additions to the policy and the need to set a deadline. We can offer a normal deadline at the first days of September, or if maintainers really want to do the transition as soon as possible do that in a couple of weeks, leaving July full for testing. In practice, this possibility of choices probably means Septemper, but who knows. In any case they should know the deadline before the 15th of July. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Sun Jun 16 15:57:02 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 16:57:02 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map Message-ID: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> Okay, it is raining today in my town and I could not refrain myself from implementing the automatic generation of the regions-to-spelling.map file of the libspell4 package. First of all, I apologize for going on without waiting for the follow-up of the discussion. For that reason, I consider my changes quite experimental, and if it happens that I made bad choices, we can revert the code to the previous state. I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to keep up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. The dictionaries-common generates now automatically the regions-to-spelling.map file each time a new dictionary is installed (in the same way JEd and emacsen support is generated). This file is now in /var/cache/dictionaries-common. In order to make things work without changes in the libpspell package, the dictionaries-common package does two things: 1) Diversion of the /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map file. (This is why a new debian/dictionaries-common.preinst has been added.) 2) Creation of the symlink /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map -> /var/cache/dictionaries-common/regions-to-spelling.map On the IDWP maitainer side, the only new thing that is required is the addition of a new field in debian/info-ispell file, like this: Locale: pt_BR I committed the changes to the dict-common CVS repository and uploaded to the staging area two modified Ispell dict package: ibrazilian and iportuguese. I tested the changes with abiword and it seems to work. Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agustín? :-) make the necessary changes to the Policy document. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 09:46:29 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 10:46:29 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > Okay, it is raining today in my town and I could not refrain myself from > implementing the automatic generation of the regions-to-spelling.map file of > the libspell4 package. > > First of all, I apologize for going on without waiting for the follow-up of > the discussion. For that reason, I consider my changes quite experimental, > and if it happens that I made bad choices, we can revert the code to the > previous state. > > I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of > regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a > burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to keep > up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. > Wonderful. Thanks for doing that. I see one important problem about that. I think that file is or can also be used by aspell dictionaries, so we are taking power on something not currently covered by the policy. However that is a step towards the future if at sometime aspell gets integrated. In the meantime, if we do not want aspell packages to be affected, we must make sure that entries in diverted 'regions-to-spelling.map' are always merged and present in the autogenerated one. Also, we should not use different names for entries already there. This is still putting our feet out of the policy scope, but at least we are only adding things to the existing ones, not changing or removing previous definitions. We should also notify this to the pspell maintainer. Domenico, has that package already been adopted? > The dictionaries-common generates now automatically the > regions-to-spelling.map file each time a new dictionary is installed (in the > same way JEd and emacsen support is generated). This file is now in > /var/cache/dictionaries-common. In order to make things work without > changes in the libpspell package, the dictionaries-common package does two > things: > > 1) Diversion of the /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map file. > (This is why a new debian/dictionaries-common.preinst has been > added.) > > 2) Creation of the symlink /usr/share/pspell/regions-to-spelling.map -> > /var/cache/dictionaries-common/regions-to-spelling.map > > On the IDWP maitainer side, the only new thing that is required is the > addition of a new field in debian/info-ispell file, like this: > > Locale: pt_BR > > I committed the changes to the dict-common CVS repository and uploaded to > the staging area two modified Ispell dict package: ibrazilian and > iportuguese. I tested the changes with abiword and it seems to work. > As a matter of fact, I think that the only affected packages are english dicts and portuguese dicts. Norwegian uses different language locales for bokmal and nynorsk (I have to change that in the norwegian dict, currently is wrong). > Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my > changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agustín? :-) make > the necessary changes to the Policy document. > I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks about this. By the way, I have seen that Peter Makholm, danish and faroese dicts maintainer has sent an ITA for aspell. Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 14:22:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:22:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > Merging is rather complicated to implement, since the > regions-to-spelling.map file is always generated from scratch in the > present implementation. We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > > >>I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks >>about this. > > > Me too. Is he hearing to this mailing list? > He said he was, but you can check that as list manager for dict-common-dev. I am also cc'ing him this mail just in case. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 17 14:39:03 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:39:03 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 15:22]: > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their > values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry > with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add > the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its > way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated > with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I have to have the requested info. At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, among others). -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 15:08:38 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:08:38 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by > aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > have to have the requested info. > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. > At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of > Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will > open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, > among others). > Yes, I am also very surprised about how useful is pspell. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Mon Jun 17 16:10:00 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:10:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 16:08]: > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly > required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell > is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants > currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that > corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that > those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, > thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell > for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. I implemented your suggestion and cvs committed the changes in the DictionariesCommon.pm.in file. Please test. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 17:09:37 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:09:37 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-17 16:08]: > > >>I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly >>required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with aspell >>is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english variants >>currently in regions-to-spelling.map (american, british and canadian), that >>corresponds to the english dicts in aspell-en. That way we make sure that >>those entries that were previously provided by libpspell4 are always there, >>thus allowing somebody to use aspell-en for all english dicts and ispell >>for the other ones, without even having i{american,british} installed. > > > I implemented your suggestion and cvs committed the changes in the > DictionariesCommon.pm.in file. Please test. > Thanks, what a fast reaction! I tested it and works as expected. Just one minor thing, I first updated dictionaries-common and so was a while without any valid regions-to-spelling.map, but as soon as I installed a new ispell dict everything worked as expected. This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. This is a rather strange case, but might worth adding a call to '/usr/sbin/update-default-ispell --rebuild' to the configure section of dictionaries-common.postinst. What do you think? Another really minor thing. It would be good to not only say at the autogenerated regions-to-spelling.map file that it is autogenerated, but also say who did it e.g. 'tools from the dictionaries-common package'. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:39:14 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:39:14 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626173914.GG4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 06:09:37PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Another really minor thing. It would be good to not only say at the > autogenerated regions-to-spelling.map file that it is autogenerated, but > also say who did it e.g. 'tools from the dictionaries-common package'. > this is good idea. since no debian packages will own it, dpkg -S would not be of help understanding who/what is in charge for it. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:42:53 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:42:53 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 06:09:37PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Just one minor thing, I first updated dictionaries-common and so was a > while without any valid regions-to-spelling.map, but as soon as I > installed a new ispell dict everything worked as expected. > hmmm... > This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. > dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, > but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. > this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 26 18:25:48 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:25:48 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: >>This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. >>dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, >>but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. >> > > this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install > an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! > Then we must preserve the diversion, so if dictionaries-common is not installed there is always a valid regions-to-spelling.map. In the future, when we know more about how to deal with dictionaries-common and aspell this latter might depend on dictionaries-common. That would be required if some sort of update-default-aspell script is used to add entries from aspell dicts to regions-to-spelling.map file. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Wed Jun 26 18:53:56 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:53:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> <20020617151000.GU3424@laboiss0> <3D0E09C1.6010008@aq.upm.es> <20020626174253.GH4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3D19F91C.805@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626175356.GU3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-26 19:25]: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > >>This can affect people using only aspell dicts and wordlists. > >>dictionaries-common would then divert the regions-to-spelling.map file, > >>but no new file is created since no ispell dictionary is installed. > >> > > > >this is a problem. think at a aspell user that is not going to install > >an ispell dictionary. he will never get a valid regions-to-spelling.map! > > > Then we must preserve the diversion, so if dictionaries-common is not > installed there is always a valid regions-to-spelling.map. I vote for preserving the diversion, too. -- Rafael From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:37:06 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:37:06 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> <3D0DED66.6050607@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626173706.GF4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 04:08:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > > > >Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed > >by > >aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > >have to have the requested info. > > > > I think that is the same as for ispell dicts, no entry is strictly > required unless you have the dict installed, but my experience with > aspell is very low. I would suggest putting only those three english my experience too is not too high :( i learned many things on it only lately... definitively i'm not a good maintainer for it. anyway i also suppose that nothing is required if the corresponding dictionary is not installed. > >At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration > >of > >Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will good, at least i'm not obstructing a wanted evolution towards higher quality :) -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:27:21 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:27:21 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> <20020617133903.GR3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020626172721.GE4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:39:03PM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > * Agust?n Mart?n Domingo [2002-06-17 15:22]: > > > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have their > > values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new entry > > with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and if not add > > the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if aspell makes its > > way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide entries duplicated > > with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > > Do you know which entries in regions-to-spelling.map are required/imposed by > aspell? Your suggestion above is quite straightforward to implement, but I > have to have the requested info. > i don't think aspell requires anything. this file should be used only when the aspell asks for language tags (it is a way to ask aspell for a particular dictionary/language/jrgon/dilect/whatever) like en_GB or it_IT in order to know which worldlist should be taken, since their name starts with the extended name of the language. > At any rate, I am quite happy that Domenico pushed us towards integration of > Pspell support. We obtained AbiWord support (almost) for free and it will > open the way for all applications using libpspell (sylpheed-claws and balsa, > among others). > there is also gnome-spell, which is a component that wraps around pspell. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 19 15:58:44 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:58:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020619145844.GA4546@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:22:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > Me too. Is he hearing to this mailing list? > > > He said he was, but you can check that as list manager for > dict-common-dev. I am also cc'ing him this mail just in case. > yes, i'm subscribed. only i'm in the middle of exam session and i cannot pay to much attention. i cannot express my idea on something i cannot look at. mails are still here, i'll look at them as soon as possible. sorry thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:22:35 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:22:35 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> <20020617122852.GQ3424@laboiss0> <3D0DE29E.9070606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626172235.GD4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:22:38PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > > > > Merging is rather complicated to implement, since the > > regions-to-spelling.map file is always generated from scratch in the > > present implementation. > > We can parse the diverted file. But yes, it is much simpler to have > their values hardcoded as starting authoritative values and for each new > entry with a Locale field check whether the key is already defined and > if not add the entry to the hash. This structure can also be used if > aspell makes its way into the policy, since aspell dicts will provide > entries duplicated with respect to those from the equivalent ispell dicts. > marging is not required is pspell start to not provide regions-to-spelling.map . this is my intention. let me know -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 18:21:05 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:21:05 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Experimental support for regions-to-spelling.map In-Reply-To: <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> References: <20020616145702.GG3424@laboiss0> <3D0DA1E5.8090608@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626172105.GC4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 10:46:29AM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Rafael Laboissiere wrote: .. > > > >I decided to let the individual IDWP have total control on the contents of > >regions-to-spelling.map. IMO, it is much better so, because it would be a > >burden to either the libpspell or the dictionaries-common maintainers to > >keep > >up with changes in locale definitions and pwli file names. > > > > Wonderful. Thanks for doing that. > yes, wonderful. pspell has a bug for this file. #144884. > I see one important problem about that. I think that file is or can also > be used by aspell dictionaries, so we are taking power on something not > currently covered by the policy. However that is a step towards the > future if at sometime aspell gets integrated. > i agree > In the meantime, if we do not want aspell packages to be affected, we > must make sure that entries in diverted 'regions-to-spelling.map' are > always merged and present in the autogenerated one. Also, we should not > use different names for entries already there. This is still putting our > feet out of the policy scope, but at least we are only adding things to > the existing ones, not changing or removing previous definitions. > oh, nothing is more easy. i can release a libpspell without regions-to-spelling.map. this file is provided by the upstream as is. i only need to delete it from the package before the deb creation:) > We should also notify this to the pspell maintainer. Domenico, has that > package already been adopted? > no, i'm still in charge for it. i'll upload a new version soon. > As a matter of fact, I think that the only affected packages are english > dicts and portuguese dicts. Norwegian uses different language locales > for bokmal and nynorsk (I have to change that in the norwegian dict, > currently is wrong). > maybe also for spanish and french? i don't know. > >Please, test the new scheme. Comments, as usual, are welcome. If my > >changes are adopted, I would appreciate that a brave soul (Agust?n? :-) > >make > >the necessary changes to the Policy document. > > > > I will do. First I would like to know what Domenico Andreoli thinks > about this. > yesss.. please continue with this work :) you guys are doing a great job even without the support i should provide you. thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Mon Jun 17 14:31:32 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:31:32 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Draft for a sort of news bulletin Message-ID: <3D0DE4B4.4040300@aq.upm.es> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090409040607090706040902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, Since it seems that we will not have time for a deadline before summer I have rewritten the ANNOUNCE.pre-final to something looking more a news bulletin to show maintaners the latest news about the project and introducing the proximity of a deadline for the transition. Alhough the document leaves the door open to an enthusiastic call for a fast transition, reallity points to september. Find attached a draft. A copy is in the CVS. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html --------------090409040607090706040902 Content-Type: text/plain; name="ANNOUNCE.news1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ANNOUNCE.news1" Hi all, Welcome to the latest news related to the dict-common project for=20 Debian. This project has to do with policy and common support for=20 ispell dictionaries and wordlists in Debian. - On the one hand, we are pleased to announce a further step in the=20 dictionaries-common project: We now have at the sourceforge=20 staging area ports to the new system of all ispell dictionaries=20 and wordlists currently in Debian! - On the other hand, we have a nice latest new: policy now covers=20 compatibility with pspell-ispell modules. That means that e.g.=20 abiword now works properly with the ispell dictionaries following=20 this new policy. This means that we can make a full testing of the whole system to=20 debug for major problems. So, please, test and test. It is our point=20 of view that minor problems can be debugged in the official Debian=20 repository after the transition has been carried out.=20 This brings us to the need for a deadline. Our initial candidate for=20 a deadline was the end of this month, but real life, work on=20 integration of pspell support and building of the remaining packages=20 has taken a bit more than expected. This has probably made this=20 deadline too short. If we move the deadline to some week in July we=20 have the problem that August is coming and that in that month many=20 of us will be unavailable. So seems more reasonable to set the=20 deadline in the first days of September unless you really want the=20 transition to be done right now (that is, in a couple of weeks). In=20 any case please let us know what do you think about this. One important thing: we are trying to do our best to keep in sync=20 packages in the sourceforge staging area with packages in Debian=20 unstable. But remember that both systems are no longer compatible,=20 so please do not upload any old style ispell dictionary or wordlist=20 packages to Debian in the meantime. That will confuse the transition.=20 If you really have to do it, drop us an email first. That way the=20 version in the Conflicts line of dictionaries-common can be changed=20 in time and your new package will not break anything. A new policy=20 package in sync with the official one (and a higher version) should=20 then be put at the sourceforge staging area. Since the migration needs to be done in a highly coordinated way to=20 have it done in the minimum possible period of time after the deadline,=20 we need to know which are your plans with respect to it. Note that=20 after the new ispell and dictionaries-common are uploaded to Debian=20 all previous ispell dictionaries and wordlists will become=20 uninstallable. So, please let us know what you do prefer. In any case, please contact=20 us through the dict-common-dev mailing list, so we know you are not MIA. If you are still not subscribed to the dict-common-dev mailing list at=20 sourceforge, that is the best way to get in touch with us and discuss=20 the final details of the transition. Remember that the project page is at: http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ Your dictionaries-common team: Rafael Laboissi=E8re, David Coe, Agust=EDn Mart=EDn Domingo --------------090409040607090706040902-- From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 21 12:07:00 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:07:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D106190.6080908@aq.upm.es> <20020620174250.GA25148@cs.helsinki.fi> Message-ID: <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> Kai Hendry wrote: > On ke, kesä 19, 2002 at 12:48:48 +0200, Agustín Martín Domingo wrote: > >>>When I write emails with mutt, I generally write them in vim, so that >>>kills two birds with one stone. >>> >> >>How do you select different languages? > > > I guess I have to reconfigure aspell. I can send a post to vim users > mailing list asking what is the general consensus of doing spell checks. > Would you like me to do that? As a matter of fact, that info can also be of help for use of ispell as spellchecker under vim and friends. I guess that something similar in concept to ispell-wrapper can be used for aspell but until the Debian aspell people can find a time slice to see how can aspell be integrated in the policy do not expect big results. > > I was wondering if standard key binds can be incorporated to the doc if > possible. We currently include only info about that for jed, since that key bind is added by dictionaries-common. The other keybinds are supposed to belong to the documentation of the respective editors, and are not under our control, that is why we did not add them. Thanks for your help, Cheers, Agustin -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Wed Jun 26 19:34:25 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 20:34:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy In-Reply-To: <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D106190.6080908@aq.upm.es> <20020620174250.GA25148@cs.helsinki.fi> <3D1308D4.1000808@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020626183425.GI4352@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 01:07:00PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > As a matter of fact, that info can also be of help for use of ispell as > spellchecker under vim and friends. I guess that something similar in > concept to ispell-wrapper can be used for aspell but until the Debian > aspell people can find a time slice to see how can aspell be integrated > in the policy do not expect big results. [pspell side] in the interface to pspell a way to pass options is available. i don't know which is, but this is a matter of the developer using pspell. looking at url http://aspell.net/pspell-man/4_Library.html#SECTION00540000000000000000 we see that an option named "language-tag" select the language to be used for the check. this is provided by the application *to* pspell. [pspell-aspell side] libaspell shared library (and then aspell binary) manages a system of configuration files to decide various options like the language to be used. aspell module for pspell passes this option after having got it somewhere (configuration files, defaults...). please look at http://aspell.net/aspell-man/5_Customizing.html#SECTION00610000000000000000 [pspell-ispell side] ispell module for pspell seems to not provide a "language-tag" option to pspell. this sounds strange to me but through the 600 lines of code of the only source file of pspell-ispell language-tag is never mentioned. so if you want to choose a language for the check with pspell-ispell you are on you own. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 12:09:02 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:09:02 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: dict policy References: <20020619102026.GA20214@cs.helsinki.fi> Message-ID: <3D10664E.30808@aq.upm.es> Resending to dict-common-dev for archival: ------------------------------------------ Kai Hendry wrote: > I do agree some "policy" is required to sort out the dictionary AND > (please) translation dictionary mess in debian (SID). > > However, I am little dissapointed by you use of : > > ispell, well, i use *aspell*, and is that not much better !?? We are already in touch with previous aspell maintainer (and he reads the dict-common-dev mailing list). As a matter of fact was after his suggestion that we currently have full pspell-ispell support. When asking aspell dict maintainers about the possibility of integrating aspell they thought it was not as urgent as for ispell and wordlists, since there is no defaults symlinks and all the endless questions on packages installation. However that is in the todo list he passed to the new aspell maintainer, and we are waiting for feedback from them, so I expect aspell dicts to be integrated at some time in the policy. Of course any sugestion about how to do that is welcome. > > Emacs spelling? Joe? I use vim. I added this line to my .vimrc > > " Spell check > map :w!:!aspell check %:e! % > > When I write emails with mutt, I generally write them in vim, so that > kills two birds with one stone. > How do you select different languages? Thanks for your interest. I remind you that the project page is at http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ There you will find the complete text for the policy, as well as some other info like the mail archive. As I told you before all sort of collaboration is highly welcome. Cheers, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 11:54:56 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:54:56 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] dict-common project announced in DWN Message-ID: <3D106300.8090807@aq.upm.es> Resending the same message for archival. I sent it wrongly to dict-common-cvs -------------------------------------------------------- Debian Weekly News http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/2002/23/ Debian Weekly News - June 18th, 2002 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Dictionaries Policy Proposal. Agustín Martín Domingo [38]announced a proposal for the "Debian Spelling Dictionaries and Tools Policy", as well as the new dictionaries-common package, which will provide the infrastructure to implement it. This is an announcement for all interested users and developers. The proposed system deals with ispell dictionaries and wordlist packages. Comments should be sent to [39]Agustín directly. 38. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-0205/msg02856.html 39. mailto:agmartin@aq.upm.es -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 19 13:15:25 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:15:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] News of the Debian dict-common project Message-ID: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Welcome to the latest news related to the dict-common project for Debian. This project has to do with policy and common support for ispell dictionaries and wordlists in Debian. First of all let you know that the project has been announced in June 18th, 2002 edition of Debian Weekly News. Regarding real news, we have very good news for this mail: - On the one hand, we are pleased to announce a further step in the dictionaries-common project: We now have at the sourceforge staging area ports to the new system of all ispell dictionaries and wordlists currently in Debian! - On the other hand, we have a nice latest new: policy now covers compatibility with pspell-ispell modules (as of 0.6.0). That means that e.g. abiword now works properly with the ispell dictionaries following this new policy. This means that we can make a full testing of the whole system to debug for major problems. So, please, test and test. It is our point of view that minor problems can be debugged in the official Debian repository after the transition has been carried out. This brings us to the need for a deadline. Our initial candidate for a deadline was the end of this month, but real life, work on integration of pspell support and building of the remaining packages has taken a bit more than expected. This has probably made this deadline too short. If we move the deadline to some week in July we have the problem that August is coming and that in that month many of us will be unavailable. So seems more reasonable to set the deadline in the first days of September unless you really want the transition to be done right now (that is, in a couple of weeks). In any case please let us know what do you think about this. One important thing: we are trying to do our best to keep in sync packages in the sourceforge staging area with packages in Debian unstable. But remember that both systems are no longer compatible, so please do not upload any old style ispell dictionary or wordlist packages to Debian in the meantime. That will confuse the transition. If you really have to do it, drop us an email first. That way the version in the Conflicts line of dictionaries-common can be changed in time and your new package will not break anything. A new policy package in sync with the official one (and a higher version) should then be put at the sourceforge staging area. Since the migration needs to be done in a highly coordinated way to have it done in the minimum possible period of time after the deadline, we need to know which are your plans with respect to it. Note that after the new ispell and dictionaries-common are uploaded to Debian all previous ispell dictionaries and wordlists will become uninstallable. So, please let us know what you do prefer. In any case, please contact us through the dict-common-dev mailing list, so we know you are not MIA. If you are still not subscribed to the dict-common-dev mailing list at sourceforge, that is the best way to get in touch with us and discuss the final details of the transition. Remember that the project page is at: http://dict-common.sourceforge.net/ Your dictionaries-common team: Rafael Laboissière, David Coe, Agustín Martín Domingo -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From mikael.hedin@irf.se Wed Jun 19 18:56:25 2002 From: mikael.hedin@irf.se (Mikael Hedin) Date: 19 Jun 2002 19:56:25 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project In-Reply-To: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> Hi, I'd prefer the later deadline so I have time to test it myself. But I won't object if others more active prefer the early path. /Micce -- Mikael Hedin, MSc +46 (0)980 79176 Swedish Institute of Space Physics +46 (0)8 344979 (home) Box 812, S-981 28 KIRUNA, Sweden +46 (0)70 5891533 (mobile) [gpg key fingerprint = 387F A8DB DC2A 50E3 FE26 30C4 5793 29D3 C01B 2A22] From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 15:44:43 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:44:43 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> Message-ID: <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> Mikael Hedin wrote: > Hi, > > I'd prefer the later deadline so I have time to test it myself. But I > won't object if others more active prefer the early path. > Seems that nobody asked for an earlier transition, so we can start thinking on september. Since the aspell stuff that is being merged in the policy document is not as traumatic as the ispell and wordlists stuff, I hope this will not affect the transition. I will try to write a draft for a deadline announcement. Since I will participate a conference next week and will have a bad computer access, do not expect news from me about that until the other week. I would like to be able to send that mail in the middle of July, so everybody is aware of the deadline. Have a nice week, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 28 16:18:01 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:18:01 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: News of the Debian dict-common project In-Reply-To: <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> References: <3D1075DD.5090500@aq.upm.es> <878z5brw3a.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> <3D1C765B.1080606@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020628151801.GF3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-28 16:44]: > Seems that nobody asked for an earlier transition, so we can start > thinking on september. September sounds reasonable, but rather towards the end of the month. I will be incommunicado during the whole August. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Tue Jun 25 14:40:21 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:40:21 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <1024669030.545.41.camel@cuileann> <20020621150005.GU3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1872C5.1030501@aq.upm.es> > * Alastair McKinstry [2002-06-21 16:19]: > > >>Fine. I'll join the dict-common-dev list. > Let us know when you subscribe to avoid ccing to you Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > This is a debatable issue, for sure. However, the Debian people tend to be > quite conservative and such a change will face a quite strong opposition, I > guess. I fully understand your point, but if the only benefit is template > searching, that is too few to have the change adopted. > > > > Again, I do not see any sensible benefit in changing the names of packages > now. This will only bring headaches. The situation may be different, > however, if somebody has a really strong argument for the name change. > Adding more to this, in a previous incarnation of the policy (that was never adopted) we used a more descriptive naming scheme, e.g, spell-ga would have been named idict-irish-gaelic, spell-gd idict-scottish-gaelic and so on. But we found strong opposition from maintainers who claimed that those changes would strongly confuse users that expect the classical names in Debian. Since after the dict-common system has been redesigned to its current shape the only real advantage of this naming scheme is that all ispell dicts appear together in dselect and friends (and the same with wordlists, using prefix 'words-') we found that to be a very little benefit compared to the opposition we found. So we finally decided to keep the old names. That also makes some things in the transition easier (there is no need to worry about old emacsen files provided by old-style packages, a package like 'miscfiles' can provide a wordlist without requiring package split and other issues). If at some time other reasons for a more descriptive name appear I would prefer something like we used (either with ispell- or idict- prefix) to the language locale name. This latter can even be more confusing, see e.g. the norwegian package, that provides ispell dicts for two written versions of norwegian, bokmal (with locale 'no') and nynorsk (with locale 'nn'). Using locales would not be as clear as inorwegian or idict-norwegian, as a matter of fact it would force package splitting. As Rafael told you, the system has currently tools to provide the same funcionallity as the locale naming scheme without using that scheme. Cheers, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:08:00 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:08:00 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages In-Reply-To: <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 11:55:52AM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > Great. Since the new Policy is still under discussion, and the transition > phase did not start yet, you should not upload your packages to unstable. > For that, we have a staging area at SourceForge. If you wish, we can add > you to the list of developers of the dict-common project, such that you can > upload your package there. Just tell us your SF user name. > please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username is, guess it, cavok. thanks cavok -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 14:34:03 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:34:03 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] cavoc added to the project (Was Re: FYI: New spell packages) References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username > is, guess it, cavok. > Done, -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 15:39:10 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:39:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] cavoc added to the project (Was Re: FYI: New spell packages) In-Reply-To: <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> <20020627130800.GB16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <3D1B144B.7070602@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020627143910.GC30171@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 03:34:03PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > Domenico Andreoli wrote: > > > >please, could i be added to the developers on the sf project? my username > >is, guess it, cavok. > > > Done, thanks -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Wed Jun 26 15:55:51 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:55:51 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? Message-ID: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> Hi all, Peter, I am cc'ing you because of your ITA on aspell. Domenico already reads the dict-common-dev list. I made some minor changes in the pwli files section of the dict-common policy and thought about merging in that section the equivalent info and requirements for aspell dictionaries. I did a first draft for that and would like to know what the aspell people think about the draft itself and about including it in the dict-common policy document. Here goes the draft: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The pspell pwli files for ispell and aspell dictionaries All ispell and aspell dictionary packages must provide the corresponding pspell-ispell or pspell-aspell pwli file for each supplied dictionary. That pwli file must be installed at /usr/share/pspell and named as [-[][-]]-ispell.pwli for ispell dictionaries and [-[][-]]-aspell.pwli for aspell dictionaries, where is the two letter language code, is the particular spelling when the language has multiple spellings in different parts of the world such as English and is any extra informations to distinguish the hash from other ones with the same language and spelling. is always required while and not. If the spelling is left out but the jargon is not, there needs to be two dashes between the language and the jargon. For instance de--medical-ispell.pwli Each pwli file for a ispell dictionary contains exactly one line which contains the full path of the main ispell hash, white space, then the charset in the pspell way, e.g. iso8859-1, koi8-r. Currently allowed values are iso8859-1 to iso8859-15, koi8-r and cp1252. Each pwli file for an aspell wordlist should contain exactly one line which contains the full path of the main aspell wordlist. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Wed Jun 26 21:18:44 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 22:18:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:55:51 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: > Peter, I am cc'ing you because of your ITA on aspell. Domenico already > reads the dict-common-dev list. I've just subscribed to the list. > and requirements for aspell dictionaries. I did a first draft for that > and would like to know what the aspell people think about the draft > itself and about including it in the dict-common policy document. For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible about aspell in the dictionary-policy. -- Peter Makholm | Perhaps that late-night surfing is not such a peter@makholm.net | waste of time after all: it is just the web http://hacking.dk | dreaming | -- Tim Berners-Lee From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 09:40:12 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:40:12 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627084011.GV3424@laboiss0> * Peter Makholm [2002-06-26 22:18]: > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. I think everybody is for the inclusion. The problem is to find people willing to do the actual work. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 11:34:19 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:34:19 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > > I've just subscribed to the list. > Welcome > > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. > Many of such things should come from the aspell people. For instance aspell dicts naming scheme. I think that the widespread use is aspell-language_code. This implies that all variants for the same language should be provided in the same package. Since it is also desirable that the same ispell dict source be the aspell dict source the naming scheme should be extended to variants having different ispell sources, e.g., portuguese european and portuguese brazilian, coverint not only the language code but also a variant code. Unless you are thinking about a different naming scheme, what I doubt. I think we should currently add to the policy requirements all aspell dicts must have. At a later stage we might thing of some sort of helpers like those we have for ispell dicts and wordlists. Since aspell relies (unless otherwise stated in the config file) in the definition of variable LANGUAGE, seems that there is no need of all the debconf stuff for default selection. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:02:50 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:02:50 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 12:34:19PM +0200, Agust?n Mart?n Domingo wrote: > > Many of such things should come from the aspell people. For instance > aspell dicts naming scheme. I think that the widespread use is > aspell-language_code. This implies that all variants for the same > language should be provided in the same package. Since it is also no, why should be this way? i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme aspell-[-whatever] so that a person looking for, say, portuguese he can search for aspell-pt. he can then find one or more packages which description is to be read. we cannot encode everything in the package name nor we want to include all the variants of a language in the same package. if i'm interested in it_IT maybe i'm not interested in it_CH. enforcing strict ownership of the variants to the same package is for sure inefficient. it is better to not be too picky here. > desirable that the same ispell dict source be the aspell dict source the i'm missing the point here > naming scheme should be extended to variants having different ispell > sources, e.g., portuguese european and portuguese brazilian, coverint > not only the language code but also a variant code. Unless you are > thinking about a different naming scheme, what I doubt. > indeed :) > I think we should currently add to the policy requirements all aspell > dicts must have. At a later stage we might thing of some sort of helpers i think that a naming scheme and the restriction on the pwli files would be sufficient. for instance, aspell-fr is completely broken. it doesn't provide a file named fr-aspell.pwli . i don't really know how it can work. instead aspell-de, provides de-aspell.pwli but also some other files like de_DE-40-aspell.pwli that do not seem very "pwli-compliant". this is maybe due to lack of the correct antries in regions-to-spelling.map, the upstream tryed (he succeeded for some strange coincidence) the fancy name. at the moment the lack of policy cannot make situation worse. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From peter@makholm.net Thu Jun 27 13:44:10 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:44:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> (cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it's message of "Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:02:50 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) writes: > i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still > able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme > aspell-[-whatever] For single dictionary packages this could be taken from the pwli-file. Would it be enough to use the -tag? The package providing the -aspell.pwli should be named aspell-. Other packages with multiple dictionaries could invent a tag for the package as a whole. -- Peter Makholm | 'Cause suicide is painless peter@makholm.net | It brings on many changes http://hacking.dk | And I can take or leave it if I please | -- Suicide is painless From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:48:44 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:48:44 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <87hejox55x.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627134844.GA16128@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:44:10PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote: > cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) writes: > > > i don't think we should enforce a strict naming scheme, people is still > > able to read description of the packagesa. i propose the slighter cheme > > aspell-[-whatever] > > For single dictionary packages this could be taken from the > pwli-file. Would it be enough to use the -tag? > > The package providing the -aspell.pwli should be named > aspell-. > yes, it seems ok to me > Other packages with multiple dictionaries could invent a tag > for the package as a whole. > also here it is ok anyway i wouldn't force that every jargon/spelling stays in a separate package, nor that aspell- contains every jargon/spelling. -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From Rafael Laboissiere Thu Jun 27 15:56:26 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:56:26 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> Message-ID: <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> * Domenico Andreoli [2002-06-27 15:02]: > i think that a naming scheme and the restriction on the pwli files would > be sufficient. > > for instance, aspell-fr is completely broken. it doesn't provide a file > named fr-aspell.pwli . i don't really know how it can work. We already added automatic generation of *-ispell.pwli files in dictionaries-common (version 0.6.2). This works apparently quite well and, in the future, we could extend the same thing to the aspell dictionaries. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 19:19:33 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:19:33 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > We already added automatic generation of *-ispell.pwli files in > dictionaries-common (version 0.6.2). This works apparently quite well and, > in the future, we could extend the same thing to the aspell dictionaries. > and may be also extend the work you did for autogeneration of the regions-to-spelling.map file to look both databases, aspell and ispell, aspell after a 'pspell-aspell' field containing only the pwli name stripped of '-aspell.pwli' and the Locale field. Some of the things should be much simpler than for ispell and wordlists. For instance after a quick glance, the equivalent to the update-ispell-default file for aspell would be a very simple eight lines script since no symlinks need to be set. Seems so simple that probably using slice to generate it from 'update-default.in' is much more work than installing from a separate file. Also an installdeb-aspell does not need anything about debconf, so it will be much simpler. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 28 15:53:40 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 16:53:40 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <20020628145340.GE3424@laboiss0> * Agustín Martín Domingo [2002-06-27 20:19]: > and may be also extend the work you did for autogeneration of the > regions-to-spelling.map file to look both databases, aspell and ispell, > aspell after a 'pspell-aspell' field containing only the pwli name > stripped of '-aspell.pwli' and the Locale field. > > Some of the things should be much simpler than for ispell and wordlists. > For instance after a quick glance, the equivalent to the > update-ispell-default file for aspell would be a very simple eight lines > script since no symlinks need to be set. Seems so simple that probably > using slice to generate it from 'update-default.in' is much more work > than installing from a separate file. > > Also an installdeb-aspell does not need anything about debconf, so it > will be much simpler. It seems that you have accumulated a quite large knowledge about aspell (larger than mine, anyway, which is almost inexistent). Once the specific needs for the aspell support are identified, I would gladly contribute with the implementation. If the sid version of dictionaries-common comes out with complete aspell support, that will be a big win. -- Rafael From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 16:52:10 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:52:10 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AEA2B.8050907@aq.upm.es> <20020627130250.GA16727@uzi.crema.unimi.it> <20020627145626.GW3424@laboiss0> <3D1B5735.9000401@aq.upm.es> <20020628145340.GE3424@laboiss0> Message-ID: <3D1C862A.1050700@aq.upm.es> Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > > It seems that you have accumulated a quite large knowledge about aspell > (larger than mine, anyway, which is almost inexistent). My knowledge of aspell is more shallow than seems. As a matter of fact it has been this week (or the one before?) the first time I took a glance to the aspell manual. I was lucky and found easily the information I wanted. > Once the specific > needs for the aspell support are identified, I would gladly contribute with > the implementation. Wonderful, thanks. From what I have seen, since aspell does not set a default the way ispell or wordlists do, things should be much simpler, dealing only with policy issues, regions-to-spelling.map regeneration and may be the use of a debhelper like helper. But I still need to think more on all this. > > If the sid version of dictionaries-common comes out with complete aspell > support, that will be a big win. > Or at least with a set of things all aspell dict packages must fit. I think this should be our first priority with respect to aspell. What a complete support is depends on what Peter and Domenico think about that. There are some questions for them: - ispell packages must provide an 'info-file' that is stored in a perl database. Their values are retrieved for selection of default dictionary (not needed for aspell), generation of emacsen+jed+mutt support and automatic rebuilding of the pspell regions-to-spelling.map file. When the installdeb-ispell helper is used when building the package this file is also used for building and installing a pwli file and the helper also adds the corresponding debhelper snippet to update the perl database once the package is installed or removed. ¿Would it worth a similar scheme for aspell dicts? I think this would help automating building of the regions-to-spelling.map file. The use of the debhelper like build helper is also useful. - I really have no idea about how can aspell be used under emacs and how it will interact with the redefinition of the menus we do. Any hint? -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From agmartin@aq.upm.es Thu Jun 27 13:06:41 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:06:41 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > > For what it is worth I would be absolutly for including anything sensible > about aspell in the dictionary-policy. > Some additions from my working copy: At the top of the policy document: Warning Some aspell elements are being slowly included in the policy document. However, this is by far not complete, and the general sections most probably will not apply to aspell. Trust only the aspell specific references. and at the 'Installation Directories and Symlinks' section: Aspell dictionary hashed files and, if exist, 'multi' files, must be placed in directory /usr/lib/aspell/. Aspell language data files and if exists, soundslike data file must be placed in directory /usr/share/aspell/. Please refer to the aspell documentation for details about these files. Will commit soon if there are no objections on them. -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Thu Jun 27 13:39:58 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:39:58 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:06:41 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: > Some additions from my working copy: Another addition: At the 'Relationships' section: - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package 'aspell-dictionary' -- Peter Makholm | Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice, pull down your peter@makholm.net | pants and slide on the ice http://hacking.dk | -- Sidney Freedman From cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it Thu Jun 27 14:55:15 2002 From: cavok@filibusta.crema.unimi.it (Domenico Andreoli) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:55:15 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <20020627135515.GB16128@uzi.crema.unimi.it> On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:39:58PM +0200, Peter Makholm wrote: > Agust?n Mart?n Domingo writes: > > > Some additions from my working copy: > > Another addition: > > At the 'Relationships' section: > > - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package > 'aspell-dictionary' > seconded -----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok --[ http://filibusta.crema.unimi.it/~cavok/gpgkey.asc ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50 From agmartin@aq.upm.es Fri Jun 28 16:57:04 2002 From: agmartin@aq.upm.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn_Domingo?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:57:04 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Message-ID: <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> Peter Makholm wrote: > Another addition: > > At the 'Relationships' section: > > - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual package > 'aspell-dictionary' > Just one comment, why 'should' instead of something stronger? -- ===================================================================== Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid, (U. Politecnica de Madrid) tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554, email:agmartin@aq.upm.es, http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html From peter@makholm.net Fri Jun 28 18:57:22 2002 From: peter@makholm.net (Peter Makholm) Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 19:57:22 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: Including aspell pwli files in the dict-common policy? In-Reply-To: <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> =?iso-8859-1?q?(Agust=EDn_Mart=EDn?= Domingo's message of "Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:57:04 +0200") References: <3D19D5F7.9080901@aq.upm.es> <87r8itu72z.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1AFFD1.5040305@aq.upm.es> <87lm90x5cx.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> <3D1C8750.9090705@aq.upm.es> Message-ID: <87y9czqoal.fsf@xyzzy.adsl.dk> Agustín Martín Domingo writes: >> At the 'Relationships' section: >> - Each aspell dictionary package should /provide/ the virtual >> package >> 'aspell-dictionary' >> > Just one comment, why 'should' instead of something stronger? Only because that what is used for the requirements of the 'ispell-dictionary' and 'wordlist' virtual packages. -- Peter Makholm | First you fall in love with Antarctica, and then it peter@makholm.net | breaks you heart. And if Antartcica doesn't do it http://hacking.dk | Valerie Kenning might | -- Antarctica From Rafael Laboissiere Fri Jun 21 10:55:52 2002 From: Rafael Laboissiere (Rafael Laboissiere) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:55:52 +0200 Subject: [Dict-common-dev] Re: FYI: New spell packages In-Reply-To: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> References: <1024647905.545.22.camel@cuileann> Message-ID: <20020621095552.GP3424@laboiss0> [ N.B. : I am Cc:ing this reply to the dict-common-dev mailing list. I am quoting your msg and I hope that you will not mind.] * Alastair McKinstry [2002-06-21 10:39]: > I am the upstream maintainer of three ispell packages: > spell-ga (Irish / "Gaelic" ), currently 0.9.3 > spell-gd (Scots Gaelic / "Gaidhglig" ) currently 0.3 > spell-gv (Manx Gaelic / "Gaelg" ) currently 0.3 > > These packages are present in Mandrake; I am a debian New Maintainer > and have recently packaged spell-ga for Debian (its in Sid). I am > currently packaging spell-gd, spell-gv for Sid. > > The source package "spell-ga" produces the ispell package ispell-ga. > I intend to make it conform to Debian standards, renaming ispell-ga to > iirish-1.0, and have spell-ga also produce wirish-1.0. Also, > spell-gd will give the binary packages igaelic-0.5 and wgaelic-0.5, > spell-gv giving imanx-0.5 and wmanx-0.5. > > These packages will conform to the new policy. Great. Since the new Policy is still under discussion, and the transition phase did not start yet, you should not upload your packages to unstable. For that, we have a staging area at SourceForge. If you wish, we can add you to the list of developers of the dict-common project, such that you can upload your package there. Just tell us your SF user name. > (The Mandrake RPM names for the packages make it possible to > check for the existence of a spell check package for a given language > using the template "spell-$langcode". I believe that we should name the > debian ispell packages this way, so they can be autoinstalled easily > later, but thats a debate for another day ?). This is a debatable issue, for sure. However, the Debian people tend to be quite conservative and such a change will face a quite strong opposition, I guess. I fully understand your point, but if the only benefit is template searching, that is too few to have the change adopted. -- Rafael