Re: bison and i18n

[Stepan Kasal]

Hi Bruno,

On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 01:25:16PM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Stepan Kasal wrote:
> > If the bison-runtime contains only the .mo file, then many distributors
> > will forget to set the dependency.
> > But if we change bison so that it installs a shared library which will
> > eventually be used bu the applications, then the dependency will be
> > discovered automatically.
> 
> But then the application's Makefile needs changes: -lbison. This is an
> annoyance, because
>   - "bison -y" is no longer equivalent to YACC, [since YACC doesn't
>     create a dependency to a library],
>   - so far, libbison would contain nothing of real use.

yes, in the meantime Arnold and others have assured me that the bison
skeleton is not big enough to a separate library.

So I agree that libbison is not a good idea.

> Can we imagine a way to hint distributors to add the dependency to
> bison-runtime without changing the application's Makefile?

No idea.  OK, let it be, it's their problem.

If the dependency is missing, the worst think which can happen is that
the Bison specific messages will stay in English.  A user or two will
complain, and they'll look at it and fix it.

Just make sure that the info is ready on all places where they might
look for it:
1) README file in bison
2) NEWS file in bison
3) as a comment in the bison-generated *.c file, perhaps near the
   domain definition, or near the "#define _".
4) ... (other places?)

Have a nice day,
        Stepan Kasal