psql patch

Started by Guillaume Lelargealmost 20 years ago3 messagespatches

Jump to latest

Guillaume Lelarge

guillaume@lelarge.info

almost 20 years ago

Hi all,

You'll find attached a small patch (CVS HEAD) to allow translation on
two psql strings.

Please apply, thanks.

Regards.

--
Guillaume.

Tom Lane

tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us

almost 20 years ago

In reply to: Guillaume Lelarge (#1)

Re: psql patch

Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> writes:

diff -r1.89 print.c
853c853
< 					snprintf(record_str, 64, "* Record %lu", record++);
---
snprintf(record_str, 64, _("* Record %lu"), record++);

855c855
< snprintf(record_str, 64, "[ RECORD %lu ]", record++);
---

snprintf(record_str, 64, _("[ RECORD %lu ]"), record++);

Hm, these strings were never localizable in previous versions; if we
make them so, do we risk breaking any code that examines psql output?

What about the equivalent headers in the other output formats?

regards, tom lane

Guillaume Lelarge

guillaume@lelarge.info

almost 20 years ago

In reply to: Tom Lane (#2)

Re: psql patch

Tom Lane a ecrit le 13/09/2006 18:05:

Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> writes:
diff -r1.89 print.c
853c853
< 					snprintf(record_str, 64, "* Record %lu", record++);
---
snprintf(record_str, 64, _("* Record %lu"), record++);

855c855
< snprintf(record_str, 64, "[ RECORD %lu ]", record++);
---

snprintf(record_str, 64, _("[ RECORD %lu ]"), record++);
Hm, these strings were never localizable in previous versions; if we
make them so, do we risk breaking any code that examines psql output?

Don't know but I always thought tools shoudn't rely on strings output.

What about the equivalent headers in the other output formats?

Which one ? can you give me an example ?

Regards.

--
Guillaume.

psql patch

Attachments: