Re: Adding an option to xgettext

[Harvey Chapman]

On Mar 31, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Harvey Chapman wrote:

> Thank you very much. I've added you answer to the question I posted at stack 
> overflow.
> 
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2548975/howto-find-unmarked-strings-with-gettext
> 
> Harvey
> 
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 5:30 AM, Bruno Haible wrote:
>> 
>> You don't need a new xgettext option for this:
>> 1. Run xgettext once, without --extract-all, to get the normal POT file.
>> 2. Run xgettext with --extract-all, to get all strings.
>> 3. Run "msgcomm --less-than=2" on the two POT files, to get the difference,
>>    and see whether the output is empty. You can use option --force-po
>>    to force an empty POT file even if both inputs are the same.

After more research, this doesn't work for what I want. I guess it's because 
the gettext_noop()'s are stripped before xgettext does its work. What I want to 
know is if any of the strings are not marked in anyway. Example:

1: gettext("one")
2: gettext_noop("two")
3: "three"

I want to be able to get a list that just contains 3:"three". The solution 
above returns 2 & 3. Is this possible with the gettext family of tools, or will 
I need something else?

Thanks,
Harvey

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature