Re: Patch for pt_BR (libpq) - part two

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Rijndael AES Cipher <sartre(at)alltv(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch for pt_BR (libpq) - part two
Date: 2002-08-29 22:15:42
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0208291816040.1108-100000@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Rijndael AES Cipher writes:

> This file goes to src/interfaces/libpq and nls.mk must include an
> extra pt_BR only. make maintainer-check also pointed a correct '82
> translated messages'.

Is there a strong reason not to simply use "pt"?

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-08-29 22:16:40 Re: swedish pg_controldata
Previous Message Nigel J. Andrews 2002-08-29 22:06:15 Re: [GENERAL] worried about PGPASSWORD drop