[Pkg-fglrx-devel] review debconf templates of fglrx-driver [non-free]

[Christian PERRIER]

Quoting Andreas Beckmann (debian at abeckmann.de):

> Your suggestion "You should use" is good, there is no need for any
> "source" of that recommendation.

Just correct the typo I made in "should", then..:-)



> For "leftover config" a debconf warning could be displayed in
> fglrx-driver.postrm remove if $(grep fglrx /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/*) returns something. Although it's too late for
> users that are going to uninstall fglrx without upgrading first.
> Similarily the postinst should use debconf instead of echo to present
> the hint how to enable fglrx in xorg.conf.
> 
> So, what about this extension of the above template:
> 
>     You should use the free radeon driver (package: xserver-xorg-video-
>     radeon) for these cards.
>     Note: The fglrx-driver package needs to be purged (removal is
>     not sufficient) and fglrx configuration needs to be removed from
>     xorg.conf (and xorg.conf.d/) before the radeon driver can be used.
>     .
>     You may install fglrx anyway (for example to drive some other card).
> 
> Is it clear for the translators that radeon, fglrx, and the package
> names are not to be translated? Should there be any quotes being used?


Yes, that would be clear. My only concern is about the template
length. Too verbose templates are split and users need to scroll to
read them, in 80x25 text displays (or in small terminals).

Too verbose explanations should then be avoided and maybe moved to a
README.Debian file.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fglrx-devel/attachments/20120613/109bfe77/attachment.pgp>