Dear Maintainer, I would like to request the package gettext to be bumped to 0.24 for the Debian 13 release. The newer version contains support for extracting strings with xgettext from Rust projects. For context, lines containing the `!` character where ignored by xgettext on previous versions, making it impossible to use macros for formatting strings. From the NEWS file: Version 0.24 - February 2025 # Programming languages support: * JavaScript: - xgettext now parses recursive JSX expressions correctly. * Rust: - xgettext now supports Rust. - 'msgfmt -c' now verifies the syntax of translations of Rust format strings. - A new example 'hello-rust' has been added. * C: - A new example 'hello-c-http' has been added, showing the use of GNU gettext in a multithreaded web server. * C++: - A new example 'hello-c++-gnome3' has been added. * Ruby: - A new example 'hello-ruby' has been added. # Improvements for maintainers: * When xgettext creates the POT file of a package under Git version control, the 'POT-Creation-Date' in the POT file usually no longer changes gratuitously each time the POT file is regenerated. # Caveat maintainers: * Building the po/ directory now requires GNU make on specific platforms: macOS, Solaris, AIX.
El 28/3/25 a las 9:36, Maximiliano escribió: Hello. Thanks for your interest. Yes, I know that 0.24 is out, but I've already checked and it breaks too many packages, so we will have to keep the current version for trixie. Thanks.
Everything marked here is done though: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-qa@lists.debian.org;tag=gettext-0.23 Thank you, Jeremy Bícha
El 28/3/25 a las 13:05, Jeremy Bícha escribió: I fail to see what kind of point you are trying to make with such comment. That was for gettext 0.23. The packages that gettext 0.24 breaks are different and they fail in a different way. I have not reported them yet, but I already know that there will be between 40 and 50. Sorry, but I don't want to introduce more than 40 RC bugs at this point. Thanks.
Sorry, I didn't understand the version numbering. For some projects, 0.23 would be a development release on the way to 0.24. I trust your judgment here. Thank you, Jeremy Bícha
To any interested party: I'm looking at this, but it will still take some time, so please be patient. (gettext 0.26 breaks quite a bunch of packages, and it needs some changes to autoconf which are still unreleased)
I made my own update of your package in the meantime because I needed the Rust support for some upstream work. BTW, I also guess that we may need it anyway when APT starts transitioning. Shall I push my stuff to a fork on Salsa? It's mostly complete, although untested and some new files are ignored for now (for DotNet runtime support, I suppose). Best regards, Eduard.
in a long time. So, we can do this: I will update my version, make it public, and then you can rebase on it. Yes, it will be helpful if you have any packaging improvements regarding rust, because my test package did not include any of the extra features yet (I primarily wanted to test the packages that would break because of it). BTW: In the meantime, the authors are requesting feedback regarding the future 1.0 release: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gettext/2025-12/msg00023.html Thanks.
retitle 1101483 please package gettext 0.24, 0.25, 0.26, 1.0 or later version thanks With version 1.0 of gettext release out now, and still somewhat early in the debian forky release cycle, couldn't we upload gettext 1.0 -- at least to experimental -- and start working on reporting and documenting the problems in packages not working with modern gettext? What is holding up things here? This bug report could be blocked on those bugs, to make things more transparent here. I suggest that even if there are 40 RC bugs due to packages not working with gettext 1.0, we should get those reported and start to nudge maintainers to fix things. It isn't unreasonable to have gettext 1.0 as a forky release goal IMHO. Are there any known important packages that for some reason cannot easily be made to work with gettext 1.0? For some very obscure package failing with 1.0, I wonder if maybe dropping translation support from that package isn't better than keeping the rest of Debian stuck on ancient gettext versions. /Simon
Yes, I agree. The plan I had in mind was to report those bugs as severity:normal while gettext is still somewhere in people.debian.org and see how far we can get providing patches. Have you taken a look at the build logs I have here? https://people.debian.org/~sanvila/build-logs/gettext-0.26/ Could you suggest some text with general hints to fix those bugs? (to put either in the same page or maybe in the wiki). That's really the main thing which is stopping me from starting the process. I prefer not to think in terms of tradeoffs. I agree that having a more recent gettext in forky is feasible, I'm just unsure about the text that should be used to report the bugs, and I of course welcome help regarding that. Thanks.
Hi. I've just announced the MBF on -devel, and hopefully will file the bugs tomorrow. For now, I would prefer not to use the block feature (but we can think about that later). Thanks.
Dear Maintainer, would be possible to upload the new version to experimental? I could use it for some tests: TeXInfo 7.3 (from git repo) can't be compiled with gettext <= 0.26. Thanks, Hilmar
Uploading to experimental might convey the wrong message that an upload for unstable is close. We don't really know, but there are two things I'd like to see before uploading to experimental: - autoconf 2.73 in unstable. I'm waiting for Alex (in Cc) to report bugs about packages which break with autoconf 2.73 (currently in experimental). - I've provided patches for some of the packages which break with gettext, but I'd like to see more, and not just from me. Thanks.
Ok, I'm going to care about the autoconf bugs myself. Hilmar: Please be patient. The autoconf bugs will definitely get us closer. Thanks.
Hi. I've finally reported the bugs against packages which FTBFS with autoconf-2.73. The reports are available here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-qa@lists.debian.org;tag=autoconf-2.73 I will try to upload gettext for experimental in a week or two. I suggest Alex that he uploads autoconf for unstable in a week or two as well. [ In the meantime, if you need the new gettext for some tests, I suggest that you temporarily disable those tests ]. Thanks.
retitle 1101483 upgrading to gettext 1.0 thanks Note: I've uploaded gettext 0.26 for experimental today and I'd like to upload it for unstable after a week, more or less. Then I will start to work on gettext 1.0, which is the ultimate goal. For that reason, I'm retitling this bug and keeping it open. Thanks.
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of gettext, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive. A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 1101483@bugs.debian.org, and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> (supplier of updated gettext package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org) Format: 1.8 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:40:00 +0200 Source: gettext Architecture: source Version: 1.0-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> Changed-By: Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> Closes: 1101483 Changes: gettext (1.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream release. Closes: #1101483. * Drop old patches, not needed anymore. * Enable all tests again. * Add python3 to Recommends, required by new program spit. * Update some lintian overrides. Checksums-Sha1: 3de090742a2b153c9b4d3faaea37c61738e980d7 2438 gettext_1.0-1.dsc 19a8dc3889d465325aa5e7a3106f0a34056249b0 10721600 gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz dcf74d3ed8229c1e95403953274d149a62ae3a83 228 gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz.asc b2bd9c4d30f97f053d49608ce4aea83d979adfee 24108 gettext_1.0-1.debian.tar.xz 63d73721d6b5b0bd0c19868a9ed35fbd5600f914 5813 gettext_1.0-1_source.buildinfo Checksums-Sha256: 4a4f75e2fcce12e8db3b60cd191fa4bc9354b962a164e4a0fc7cf931a96a10ac 2438 gettext_1.0-1.dsc 71132a3fb71e68245b8f2ac4e9e97137d3e5c02f415636eb508ae607bc01add7 10721600 gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz f0a94f0bde80f56a7dc079b9a22aaf3594915acd66fdd916e1508a10ccee506a 228 gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz.asc faa8222fb086012015bfea2c2980ffccc350cbf4442f7fdac21b97e1588476a2 24108 gettext_1.0-1.debian.tar.xz 793c7a8dd5574719ebae5b985d9a9fe5577f259e2950dcb63de7684972a624cc 5813 gettext_1.0-1_source.buildinfo Files: e2597068028c743b1afc9c73f34b1dda 2438 devel optional gettext_1.0-1.dsc dc8b2911535929cec1e263706b0a13a1 10721600 devel optional gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz dc817c5ee04322582cc13be2e29a34e8 228 devel optional gettext_1.0.orig.tar.xz.asc 23811cf9070bd6b837413a38fc0bba05 24108 devel optional gettext_1.0-1.debian.tar.xz b5a581312324856252615f958968b03b 5813 devel optional gettext_1.0-1_source.buildinfo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEE1Uw7+v+wQt44LaXXQc5/C58bizIFAmoxYUAACgkQQc5/C58b izKR8Af/Sf9dqrpiN2+Ohm7gx6FDs0I14DsCtP2HMOHjtuo63bHsfKZQoUEQ6bXw THdOGNdhIhFoOChj8RTcY4O00gpOwNBS9KdiltO9pL6cCyy1U25m6Zg+6/Pg8HQi HRW77UaEQLz4MtVctVF5bU3iziuALDINlJChVlbOSyjweNHfYD3y0wx5VIVLeo3N HvrtsSPC7utIKj0tQO3ba0k/Ku3k2o7pj4Rz0nf31F5cvMdBgUZHj2cJ7nCCbCRX Mzh6V4N+kIOpweGJ8z9upOeJApJmDcu8P1tltnZ2Hb8Rz39UuRmPe7JEeeydSSR3 LcTmIelu5v1MNYlvtIkCMdeYZvt5Bg== =5+HF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----