[Dict-common-dev] pspell, pspell-ispell, aspell and dictionaries-common

[Rafael Laboissiere]

* Agustín Martín Domingo <agmartin@aq.upm.es> [2002-06-06 17:55]:

> The other possibility we were talking about is simply telling mantainers 
> to add the required pwli files for each hash in the ispell dictionary 
> package itself, not recreated from the info-ispell file. As a matter of 
> fact if each ispell package provides the proper files at 
> /usr/share/pspell there is no need to recreate anything, and thus the 
> location would still be valid. By the way, that is also the location 
> where aspell dicts put their pwli files, and they are 'real'package 
> files, no autogenerated ones.
> 
> I think this other possibility is much simpler and straighforward, 
> requiring only a minor change in policy and of course rebuilding the 
> dictionaries.  From my point of view, recreating everything each time a 
> new dictionary is added is an unnecesary extra complexity.

I think that both implementations have comparable complexity.  The advantage
of changing installdeb-ispell to include the pwli files in the binary
package is that we keep the usual directory for libpspell.

> If we can in addition make things easier adding to installdeb-ispell the 
> possibility to install such pwli files automatically, better, but we 
> must keep in mind that each single package can install more that one 
> hash (see e.g. inorwegian), and so may need more than one pwli file.
>
> I would not touch the installation scripts for this, but think about a 
> good way to make installdeb-ispell more clever about this. This could 
> be done using a new field in the info-ispell file, but used to 
> automatically generate and install the pwli files during package build, 
> not during package install.

Okay, I buy your arguments and also think that changing installdeb-ispell is
the way to go.  There will be no problems with multiple hashes, since the
Perl code in installdeb-ispell can parse the multiple definitions in the
ispell-info file.  I will try to take a look at the implementation.

--
Rafael