[Pkg-ime-devel] [ibus] about ibus input engine packaging.

[Aron Xu]

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)
<paulliu at debian.org> wrote:
> Dear IME packaging team.
>
> Do we need some small policy or small standards for packaging ibus input
> method engines?
>

Guess no, they are bugs which should not be covered by something like a policy.

> I found that when we use ibus-setup, the preference for each input
> method engine doesn't work. It is because in ibus-setup it sets
> export IBUS_LIBEXECDIR=${libexecdir} and
> libexecdir=/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/ibus.
> That means it searches the setup program ibus-setup-<engine> in that
> directory only. However, currently the engines package their setup
> program in /usr/lib/<engine_package_name> thus ibus-setup cannot find it.
>
> Though we can execute the setup through ibus panel, but if we decide to
> not show the panel, setting up the engine through ibus-setup will become
> important.
>
> To fix this, I think that we can file bugs to the input engines
> packages. Ask them to multi-arch it and then make a symbolic link from
> usr/lib/<arch>/<package>/ibus-setup-<engine> to /usr/lib/<arch>/ibus.
> But this will be a massive filing bug reports. So I'm asking if there's
> any better ideas for this.
>

I prefer filing bugs against all these packages. There is no concrete
way to handle the situation other than this, even though ibus-setup
can be modified to fallback to search old paths.


--
Regards,
Aron