Re: psql patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql patch
Date: 2006-09-13 16:05:51
Message-ID: 12592.1158163551@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> writes:
> diff -r1.89 print.c
> 853c853
> < snprintf(record_str, 64, "* Record %lu", record++);
> ---
>> snprintf(record_str, 64, _("* Record %lu"), record++);
> 855c855
> < snprintf(record_str, 64, "[ RECORD %lu ]", record++);
> ---
>> snprintf(record_str, 64, _("[ RECORD %lu ]"), record++);

Hm, these strings were never localizable in previous versions; if we
make them so, do we risk breaking any code that examines psql output?

What about the equivalent headers in the other output formats?

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • psql patch at 2006-09-13 15:43:46 from Guillaume Lelarge

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Guillaume Lelarge 2006-09-13 16:19:11 Re: psql patch
Previous Message Guillaume Lelarge 2006-09-13 15:43:46 psql patch