Re: Kernel-Messages translation

Kurt Huwig (
Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:11:11 +0200 (CEST)

> My point exactly... "Native" versions increase the linguistic
> isolation, which is a Bad Thing. :-/

> > > Why not
add the translated messages to the original ones ?
> > > So the expert sees what he wants, and the user is also satisfied.
> > > If the translation is optional the configuration, kernel and other
> > > bloat is restricted to the ones who want the translation.
> >
> > Because the kernel currently has 10765 printk() statements, for over
> > 600k. Even if we translated all (!) of them, to just 1 additional
> > language, the kernel source tree would go up by over 1 meg!
> There are ways around this. It's safe to assume that the printk's in the
> base kernel tree will always be in English, forevermore. But it is a
> relatively simple matter to write a program that hunts down printk()'s and
> changes arguments that are string constants.

You forget, that noone ever compiles everything into the kernel. My
approach just incorporates the translations, that are needed.

> So, if someone is really interested in making a serious translation of
> the majority of the printk strings, they might proceed as follows:
> 1) Do the translation work, in whole or in part.
> 2) Build a hash table, or just use gperf, to go from English strings to the new
> ones.
> 3) Assemble a "kernel translation kit" which includes this hash and a program
> that will hunt down the relevant English printk()'s and translate them.
> This would make a nice-size downloadable add-on, far superior to a huge diff.

This is, what I am working on.


If you put a PC-formatted disk into a Macintosh, you can read it.
If you put a Mac-formatted disk into a Win95-PC, it asks you
whether it should format it.
My eMail address has changed -->