[Freeciv-Dev] Re: gettext remark

[Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 07:50:23PM +0200, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 04:26:44AM +0200, Gaute B Strokkenes wrote:
> >> 0.10.36 is sufficient for msgfmt and xgettext.
> > 
> > This is incorrect. From an old email (search the archive):
> > 
> >> > The recently introduced PL_ macro uses the plural format and this
> >> > format is only implemented in gettext 0.10.38 or above. So you
> >> > can use --with-included-gettext to get the functions but have to
> >> > provide 0.10.38 binaries.
> 
> No, you're wrong, again.  Firstly, since the version checking code was
> broken for a long time, people (like Christian Knoke) have been using
> older versions without any problems.  Secondly, even a cursory
> examination of the gettext sources reveals that the only changes
> between versions 0.10.36 and 0.10.38 are small bugfixes that are of no
> consequence to us.

> Moral: You can't necessarily trust random people from the internet,
> so you should always do your own research.

I was the one who reported that 0.10.38 is required.

I have downloaded both version and tested it. The result is almost
identical:

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
 "Language-Team: LANGUAGE <LL@xxxxxx>\n"
 "MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
 "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=CHARSET\n"
-"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8-bit\n"
+"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"

 #: common/city.c:263
 msgid "?redundant:*"

So you are correct that it looks like 0.10.36 is enough. I can't
remember why I had the idea that 0.10.38 is required. Not suprising
after 6 months.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "Of course, someone who knows more about this will correct me if I'm
  wrong, and someone who knows less will correct me if I'm right."
    -- David Palmer (palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)