Hi Osamu,
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 01:11 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > all_ALL is meant as fallback default as I remember.
> >
> > Perhaps def_DEF would have been a more appropriate string?
>
> That is still awkward. Why not "default".
I prefer "default" too. Since "all_ALL" exists, I assumed there was some
design decision to only use the format ll_CC.
> > 1) I definitely agree we need a -d option. We should not be exposing the
> > user to rm -f ~/.xinput.d/*.
>
> Patch welcom for squeeze. Too late for lenny.
I'll add it to my TODO list. ;-)
> > However, we still need an all_ALL that over-rides everything else.
>
> Changing meaning is bad idea for upgrade. If we need override, why not
> introduce "override". Adding new alias is fine so we can introduce
> "default".
Then let us at a minimum,
1) Remove "all_ALL" from the documentation.
2) Add a check to im-switch which warns the user of a deprecated
"all_ALL", if it exists.
3) Add a fake "default" locale that acts like a default.
4) I would prefer to use the string "all" for a fake locale that is
meant to represent 'all' locales, instead of the string "override". It
is clear and simple.
So, I would prefer something like this
------------------------------------------------------------------------
for f in "$HOME/.xinput.d/all" \
"$HOME/.xinput.d/${LNG}" \
"$HOME/.xinput.d/all_ALL" \
"$HOME/.xinput.d/default" \
"/etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/all" \
"/etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/${LNG}" \
"/etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/all_ALL" \
"/etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/default" ; do
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 3) I wonder if the packages that depend on im-switch use "all_ALL".
> >
> > Reverse Depends:
> > uim-common,im-switch
> > skkinput,im-switch
> > scim-pinyin,im-switch
> > scim,im-switch
> > kinput2-common,im-switch
> > imhangul,im-switch
> > gtk-im-libthai,im-switch
> > gcin,im-switch
> > fcitx,im-switch
>
> I do not think they should use all_ALL to set im-switch beavior (I know
> this may not be followed as I know.)
>
> /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/default was meant to be the system default fall
> back.
Ok.
> > 4) Is im-switch more complicated than it needs to be? Should we actually
> > take a step back and have a look at what it is trying to solve?
>
> That is my opinion too. I have cut down as much since I took over
> updates. But next step is think about much simpler infrastructure with
> more flexibility for each package. ... any volunteer to make this
> happen is welcome. (I think use of alternative was overkill at least
> for ~/.)
I'll add this to my TODO list too. ;-)
cya,
#
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
