FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Kernel

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-26-2012, 01:00 PM
Justin B Rye
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

Christian PERRIER wrote:
[...]
> + If you do not agree, the installation will be cancelled.
[...]
> + The installation of this package has been cancelled.
>
> Few changes. Only a spelling fix.

Sorry, Christian, this is a (particularly fiddly) en_GB-versus-en_US
spelling rule difference.

Should I revise the package descriptions? Most of the synopses have
unnecessary capitalistation, and there are lots of lists that could
accommodate extra commas, but before I start I'm wondering about those
huge verbatim lines. Why do we repeat brandnames like "Broadcom
NetXtremeII" so many times when once would be enough to make the
package show up in an "apt-cache search"?

Particular offenders:

> * Broadcom NetXtremeII 5706/5708 firmware (mips), version Linux 2.6.32 (bnx2/bnx2-mips-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * Broadcom NetXtremeII 5706/5708 firmware (rv2p), version Linux 2.6.32 (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * Broadcom NetXtremeII 5709/5716 firmware (mips), version Linux 2.6.32 (bnx2/bnx2-mips-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * Broadcom NetXtremeII 5709/5716 firmware (rv2p), version Linux 2.6.32 (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * Broadcom NetXtremeII 5709 A0/A1 firmware (rv2p), version Linux 2.6.32 (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09ax-5.0.0.j3.fw)
[...]
> * Intel Wireless 5100, 5300 and 5350 firmware, version 8.24.2.12 (iwlwifi-5000-2.ucode)
> * Intel Wireless 5100, 5300 and 5350 firmware, version 8.83.5.1 (iwlwifi-5000-5.ucode)
[...]
> * SD8686 boot code, version 8.x (libertas/sd8686_v8_helper.bin, sd8686_helper.bin)
[...]
> * Agere/Prism/Symbol Orinoco firmware (AP mode), version 9.48 Hermes I (agere_ap_fw.bin)
> * Agere/Prism/Symbol Orinoco firmware (STA mode), version 9.48 Hermes I (agere_sta_fw.bin)
[...]
> * Ralink RT2760/RT2790/RT2860/RT2890/RT3090 (RT2700P[D]/RT2700E[D]/RT2800P[D]/RT2800E[D]/RT3000E[D] chipset) firmware, version 34 (rt2860.bin, rt3090.bin)

It seems to me we could abbreviate (or omit) "firmware" and "version"
in most of these, and reduce the brandnames to section-headers along
the lines of:

Broadcom NetXtremeII firmware for Linux 2.6.32:
* 5706/5708 mips (bnx2/bnx2-mips-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
* 5706/5708 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
* 5709/5716 mips (bnx2/bnx2-mips-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
* 5709/5716 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
* 5709 A0/A1 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09ax-5.0.0.j3.fw)

Is there some good reason for not doing this (e.g. because the lists
are generated automatically somehow)?
--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120826130022.GA8540@xibalba.demon.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20120826130022.GA8540@xibalba.demon.co.uk
 
Old 08-26-2012, 02:10 PM
Bastian Blank
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 02:00:22PM +0100, Justin B Rye wrote:
> Should I revise the package descriptions? Most of the synopses have
> unnecessary capitalistation, and there are lots of lists that could
> accommodate extra commas, but before I start I'm wondering about those
> huge verbatim lines. Why do we repeat brandnames like "Broadcom
> NetXtremeII" so many times when once would be enough to make the
> package show up in an "apt-cache search"?

This package description is generated from different sources. There is
currently no way to aggregate this informations.

Bastian

--
"Get back to your stations!"
"We're beaming down to the planet, sir."
-- Kirk and Mr. Leslie, "This Side of Paradise",
stardate 3417.3


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120826141027.GA3212@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org">htt p://lists.debian.org/20120826141027.GA3212@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org
 
Old 08-26-2012, 03:48 PM
Christian PERRIER
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

Quoting Justin B Rye (jbr@edlug.org.uk):
> Christian PERRIER wrote:
> [...]
> > + If you do not agree, the installation will be cancelled.
> [...]
> > + The installation of this package has been cancelled.
> >
> > Few changes. Only a spelling fix.
>
> Sorry, Christian, this is a (particularly fiddly) en_GB-versus-en_US
> spelling rule difference.

Ah, doh. Just learned something (which I'll probably forget soon)..:-)

So no double "l" in en_US?

> Should I revise the package descriptions? Most of the synopses have

I would recommend not to. See Bastian's explanations.
 
Old 08-26-2012, 04:30 PM
Justin B Rye
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

Christian PERRIER wrote:
>> Sorry, Christian, this is a (particularly fiddly) en_GB-versus-en_US
>> spelling rule difference.
>
> Ah, doh. Just learned something (which I'll probably forget soon)..:-)
>
> So no double "l" in en_US?

In en_GB, the general rule is that a final short vowel plus single
consonant doubles the consonant when you add a suffix starting with a
vowel; some letters (K, S, R) misbehave, but L is regular, so we have
"cancelled traveller's cheques".

Americans think that rule isn't complicated enough, so they only apply
it for L in stressed syllables! Thus "canceled traveler's checks",
but "controllable" and "dispelling". The idea, I suppose, is that
this is closer to how R behaves.


I think this means our d-l-e review boils down to:

-Description: Do you agree to the "@license-title@"?
+_Description: Do you agree to the "@license-title@"?

--
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120826163045.GA13603@xibalba.demon.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20120826163045.GA13603@xibalba.demon.co.uk
 
Old 08-26-2012, 04:46 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 14:00 +0100, Justin B Rye wrote:
> Christian PERRIER wrote:
> [...]
> > + If you do not agree, the installation will be cancelled.
> [...]
> > + The installation of this package has been cancelled.
> >
> > Few changes. Only a spelling fix.
>
> Sorry, Christian, this is a (particularly fiddly) en_GB-versus-en_US
> spelling rule difference.
>
> Should I revise the package descriptions? Most of the synopses have
> unnecessary capitalistation, and there are lots of lists that could
> accommodate extra commas, but before I start I'm wondering about those
> huge verbatim lines. Why do we repeat brandnames like "Broadcom
> NetXtremeII" so many times when once would be enough to make the
> package show up in an "apt-cache search"?
[...]
> It seems to me we could abbreviate (or omit) "firmware" and "version"
> in most of these, and reduce the brandnames to section-headers along
> the lines of:
>
> Broadcom NetXtremeII firmware for Linux 2.6.32:
> * 5706/5708 mips (bnx2/bnx2-mips-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * 5706/5708 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-06-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * 5709/5716 mips (bnx2/bnx2-mips-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * 5709/5716 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09-5.0.0.j3.fw)
> * 5709 A0/A1 rv2p (bnx2/bnx2-rv2p-09ax-5.0.0.j3.fw)
>
> Is there some good reason for not doing this (e.g. because the lists
> are generated automatically somehow)?

They're generated from the descriptions of each package and each file in
*/defines. They can probably be abbreviated somewhat as the description
strings are not used anywhere else.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Experience is what causes a person to make new mistakes instead of old ones.
 
Old 08-27-2012, 04:45 AM
Christian PERRIER
 
Default templates://firmware-nonfree/{templates/templates.license.in}

Quoting Justin B Rye (jbr@edlug.org.uk):

> I think this means our d-l-e review boils down to:
>
> -Description: Do you agree to the "@license-title@"?
> +_Description: Do you agree to the "@license-title@"?


Indeed. Also the other "Description" which I turned out into
"_Description" to make the paragraph translatable....which was the
original motivation for the process.

As a consequence, I moved directly to LCFC stage to speed thigns up
and move quickly to translation stage.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org