Merge lp:~charlesk/indicator-appmenu/lp-938986 into lp:indicator-appmenu/0.4
Proposed by
Charles Kerr
Status: | Merged | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Approved by: | Charles Kerr | ||||
Approved revision: | 168 | ||||
Merged at revision: | 167 | ||||
Proposed branch: | lp:~charlesk/indicator-appmenu/lp-938986 | ||||
Merge into: | lp:indicator-appmenu/0.4 | ||||
Diff against target: |
17 lines (+1/-1) 2 files modified
po/POTFILES.in (+0/-1) po/POTFILES.skip (+1/-0) |
||||
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~charlesk/indicator-appmenu/lp-938986 | ||||
Related bugs: |
|
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Allan LeSage | Approve | ||
Ted Gould | Pending | ||
Review via email: mp+95943@code.launchpad.net |
This proposal supersedes a proposal from 2012-03-04.
Description of the change
Don't mark hud.interface.c for translation.
When building with srcdir != builddir, "make check" fails in po/ because make is looking for hud.interface.c in the srcdir, but it's a built source and so it's in the builddir. This raises an interesting (to me, at least) question about how to get POTFILES.in to understand where to look for files generated from BUILT_SOURCES -- but, for the purposes of indicator-appmenu, there is a shorter path to a fix: nothing in hud.interface.c needs translation, so remove it from POTFILES.in to fix "make check."
To post a comment you must log in.
On Sun, 2012-03-04 at 19:14 +0000, charles wrote:
> When building with srcdir != builddir, "make check" fails in po/
> because make is looking for hud.interface.c in the srcdir, but it's a
> built source and so it's in the builddir. This raises an interesting
> (to me, at least) question about how to get POTFILES.in to understand
> where to look for files generated from BUILT_SOURCES -- but, for the
> purposes of indicator-appmenu, there is a shorter path to a fix:
> nothing in hud.interface.c needs translation, so remove it from
> POTFILES.in to fix "make check."
Ah, nice. I think that it probably needs to be added to POTFILES.skip
or otherwise distcheck will complain about it.
review needs-fixing