| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Subject: | Re: Translation of the NextOID message in pg_controldata |
| Date: | 2026-09-14 04:32:18 |
| Message-ID: | 49855.1789360338@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Commit cb298616463 changed the following line:
> - printf(_("Latest checkpoint's NextOID: %u\n"),
> + printf(_("Latest checkpoint's NextOID: " OID8_FORMAT "\n"),
> It appears that xgettext does not recognize PostgreSQL's OID8_FORMAT
> macro and therefore extracts only the preceding string literal as the
> msgid. In contrast, PRIu64, which is used in the same file, is
> correctly extracted as %<PRIu64>. Therefore, shouldn't we use "%"
> PRIu64 instead of OID8_FORMAT here as well?
That would be fairly sad, because it means hard-wiring the fact that
Oid8 is the same as uint64 in a bunch of non-obvious places.
Admittedly, we've lived with formatting Oid as %u for a long time.
But can we fix this some other way?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2026-09-14 04:40:14 | Re: Review items for EXCEPT TABLE publication |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2026-09-14 04:22:42 | Re: Review items for EXCEPT TABLE publication |