Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: buildrequires aspell-te
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
Summary: buildrequires aspell-te Product: Fedora Version: 11 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: hunspell-te AssignedTo: pnemade@redhat.com ReportedBy: notting@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: pnemade@redhat.com, fedora-i18n-bugs@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: ---
hunspell-te buildrequires aspell-te.
Can this be changed so it only reqiures aspell, and packages the source itself?
See hunspell-de for a potential example.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
Caolan McNamara caolanm@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |caolanm@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Caolan McNamara caolanm@redhat.com 2009-07-14 10:16:57 EDT --- Some digging around shows http://sarovar.org/frs/?group_id=247&release_id=703 as the "canonical" source location. We could either stuff aspell-te as the source to this and operate on that, or cut out the middle-man and directly use the provided te.wl.gz and use something like the attached which gives the exact same output, though not with any convenient README and/or bundled documentation about the the wordlist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
--- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara caolanm@redhat.com 2009-07-14 10:19:15 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=351589) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=351589) as a demo, if it helps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
--- Comment #4 from Parag pnemade@redhat.com 2009-07-15 01:15:39 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=353776) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=353776) updated spec file
Does this looks ok?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
Parag pnemade@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
--- Comment #5 from Caolan McNamara caolanm@redhat.com 2009-07-15 03:52:44 EDT --- I imagine notting is ok with that, as that fits "Can this be changed so it only reqiures aspell, and packages the source itself".
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
--- Comment #6 from Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com 2009-07-16 10:24:52 EDT --- Yeah, using the aspell binary/tools itself is ok (we do it elsewhere); I just don't want to drag older dictionaries in as a buildrequirement.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=511262
Parag pnemade@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #7 from Parag pnemade@redhat.com 2009-07-20 04:01:48 EDT --- fixed in hunspell-te-0.20050929-3.fc12
i18n-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org