Bug 115088

Summary:	Summaries/Descriptions of many-many rpm packages have typos.
Product:	[openSUSE] SUSE LINUX 10.0	Reporter:	Balazs Melikant <balazs.melikant>
Component:	Other	Assignee:	E-mail List <bnc-team-screening>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	E-mail List <qa-bugs>
Severity:	Normal
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	balazs.melikant
Version:	Beta 4
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	Other
OS:	SUSE Other
Whiteboard:
Found By:	Other	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---
Attachments:	The .diff file I promised (packages.en) The promised .diff file [prepared by -U10] The (complete AND) corrected 'packages.en' file of beta4...

Description Balazs Melikant 2005-09-02 21:54:06 UTC

A single file would be attached, showing quite a lot of typos in various
packages, based on the "packages.en" file.
In its present format it's more or less useless, but I decided NOT to report all
of this stuff AGAIN, separately for each package ;)
Yeah, AGAIN means, that many of them were reported already.
(Remark: there could be few extra mistakes introduced by my quick-script, caused
by some extra chars left in the file....)

Ps. To check my comments particularly to the admin/user-guide packages, please
check #115050.

Comment 1 Balazs Melikant 2005-09-02 21:56:25 UTC

Created attachment 48666 [details]
The .diff file I promised (packages.en)

Comment 2 Christoph Thiel 2005-09-04 11:17:35 UTC

Thanks for the corrections, but could you please rediff with something like:

  diff -U10 packages.old packages.new

To make it possible to detect the names of the packages that have typos corrected.

Comment 3 Balazs Melikant 2005-09-04 11:55:00 UTC

I'm sorry, I had no idea, how I should send you all of these data.
Even, that it's still not "perfect", as suggested, I did now
 balazs@khazad-dum:~/MyTemp> diff -U10 packages.en.old packages.en.new >
packages.en.diff
 balazs@khazad-dum:~/MyTemp> bzip2 packages.en.diff
where the 'packages.en.old' is the original 'packages.en' of beta4 and
'packages.en.new' is my updated variant.
Now I attach only the file resulted of the above two commands, but in case it's
needed, could provide you 'packages.en.new' as well...

Comment 4 Balazs Melikant 2005-09-04 11:57:35 UTC

Created attachment 48724 [details]
The promised .diff file [prepared by -U10]

Comment 5 Christoph Thiel 2005-09-04 12:01:15 UTC

No problem, this one looks much better. For some packages we would still need to
check packages.en, but that's just fine.

Comment 7 Balazs Melikant 2005-09-04 12:02:04 UTC

Created attachment 48725 [details]
The (complete AND) corrected 'packages.en' file of beta4...

Comment 9 Michael Gross 2005-09-05 12:56:50 UTC

Finally done (updated in PDB)!