On 10/24/2014 08:59 AM, Karel Zak wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 08:37:43AM -0400, JWP wrote: >> My sincere oligopolies to translators, but hwclock is slated for refactoring >> and I expect many message changes will be included. Hopefully, the changes >> will include improving things for translators. > > If you really plan to do the refactoring then don't care about > messages at all. The result will be completely different code (I > hope:-). But what we need to to merge all the changes by one pull > request. oligopolies? How did I do that... sincere apologizes! Ah, I misunderstood when you wrote: "I prefer refactoring if possible than write things from scratch. And for hwclock it's really critical to do the changes in small testable steps." I thought you wanted all the small steps submitted and tested in progress. The intention of this patch set was a first step in making the output cleaner and easier to read for testing the 'small steps'. It's quite ugly as is. So what is the util-linux position on message punctuation in general, and line termination specifically? The documentation seem to imply not using any. > Note that the best is to start with date types, try to describe > hwclock by structs (hwclock_control, hwclock_adjtime, hwclock_hwops, > etc.), then write small functions that work with the structs and then > high level logic. See for example cfdisk.c, losetup.c, name.c... Will do. > > Karel > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
