Acknowledgement sent
to Simon McVittie <[email protected]>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <[email protected]>.
(Sun, 05 Mar 2023 13:27:05 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: mozc is not compiled on all little-endian platforms, should it be?
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2023 13:22:34 +0000
Source: mozc
Version: 2.28.4715.102+dfsg-2.2
Severity: normal
From discussion on #1029821, it seems that mozc only supports little-endian
CPU architectures (for example i386 and arm64) and does not support
big-endian CPU architectures (for example powerpc and s390x).
At the moment, mozc is only compiled on some little-endian architectures:
* amd64
* arm64
* armel
* armhf,
* i386
* riscv64
but not on others, such as:
* mips64el
* mipsel
* ppc64el
* hurd-i386
* kfreebsd-amd64
* kfreebsd-i386
* sh4 (?)
* x32
Should mozc be compiled on *all* little-endian architectures, or are there
other reasons why it needs to be restricted to a subset of them?
If the intention is to compile mozc on all little-endian platforms, the
easiest way is probably:
# debian/control
...
Build-Depends: ..., architecture-is-little-endian, ...
...
Package: ibus-mozc
Architecture: any
...
Package: uim-mozc
Architecture: any
...
and so on, so that it builds successfully on all LE architectures (past,
present and future) but is BD-Uninstallable on all BE architectures.
If we change GNOME's idea of the default input method for Japanese locales
from anthy to mozc as requested in #1029821, then any changes here might
need to be coordinated with src:gnome-desktop (although I'm investigating
whether we can make that decision dynamically at runtime). Please keep
the GNOME team informed on what happens here.
Thanks,
smcv
Acknowledgement sent
to Maia Johnson <[email protected]>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <[email protected]>.
(Thu, 14 Dec 2023 21:48:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).
Subject: Re: mozc is not compiled on all little-endian platforms, should it
be?
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 13:39:19 -0800
I use a Japanese ppc64el desktop, and I build the mozc packages from
salsa just by adding ppc64el to the Architecture: lines in the control
file. If there is any technical reason why ppc64el was excluded, I
cannot identify it. Tested yesterday in an up to date Debian 12.4
environment to be sure. For any who would like to take a look without
building themselves, my packages are here:
https://pkg.tsundoku.ne.jp/debian/pool/bookworm/main/
Could we implement Simon's suggestion or something like it, so that
working architectures are not excluded for this package, and affected
users don't have to request their addition one by one?
Thanks!
--
maia
Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained
from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.