(prompt): Add a comment to help translators work

around the problem of making the translations of the adjective
`write-protected' and the corresponding run-time-variable noun
(e.g., file, directory, symlink, etc.) consistent.  From Paul Eggert.

diff --git a/src/remove.c b/src/remove.c
index 6fc8a1dc22b267a7ba85031ffb42136034d778e2..b90055c1945b66f76cd02858f3770df57ab68250 100644 (file)
--- a/src/remove.c
+++ b/src/remove.c
@@ -598,11 +598,18 @@ prompt (char const *filename, struct rm_options const *x,
                    : _("%s: descend into directory %s? ")),
                   program_name, quoted_name);
        else
-         fprintf (stderr,
-                  (write_protected
-                   ? _("%s: remove write-protected %s %s? ")
-                   : _("%s: remove %s %s? ")),
-                  program_name, file_type (&sbuf), quoted_name);
+         {
+           /* TRANSLATORS: You may find it more convenient to translate
+              the equivalent of _("%1$s: %3$s is write-protected and is
+              of type `%2$s'.  Remove it? ").  This is more verbose than
+              the original but it should avoid grammatical problems with
+              the output of file_type.  */
+           fprintf (stderr,
+                    (write_protected
+                     ? _("%s: remove write-protected %s %s? ")
+                     : _("%s: remove %s %s? ")),
+                    program_name, file_type (&sbuf), quoted_name);
+         }
 
        if (!yesno ())
          return RM_USER_DECLINED;