Re: [orca-list] Question about at-spi and at-spi2

[Michael Whapples <mwhapples aim com>]

Slight correction, yes it would lead to a package conflict by making 
pyatspi/at-spi2 conflict with at-spi, brltty in archlinux depends on 
at-spi. Could brltty work with at-spi2 (IE. could the at-spi2 packages 
provide at-spi)?

I have to say personally I don't like the archlinux package for brltty 
depending on at-spi, I feel the brltty at-spi driver should be a 
separate package. I know that there is a brltty package in AUR which 
doesn't require at-spi but I am on about the default which people get 
from the supported repositories.

Michael Whapples
On 10/04/11 13:30, Michael Whapples wrote:
> OK, think I may have the idea and looking at the archlinux package 
> dependencies I don't think there will be an issue in setting them as 
> conflicting.
>
> I was just asking the question as the archlinux package at-spi and 
> at-spi2-core and at-spi2-atk can all happily coexist on the system 
> according to the package dependencies (IE. pacman will let you do 
> that). I just wondered if pyatspi-2.0.0 contained the bindings for 
> working with at-spi as well, I thought to switch between using at-spi 
> on corba and at-spi on dbus it only needed the gconf settings 
> /desktop/gnome/interface/at-spi-dbus and 
> /desktop/gnome/interface/at-spi-corba changing. Does it actually 
> require different python bindings to be installed?
>
> Michael Whapples
> On -10/01/37 20:59, Trevor Saunders wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 12:13:52PM +0100, Michael Whapples wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > I have started to work on getting the archlinux accessibility
> > > packages corrected for gnome 3.0. This required pyatspi to be
> > > packaged, however I think it may cause a conflict with
> > > at-spi-1.32.0. The at-spi-1.32.0 package on archlinux includes the
> > > python bindings for at-spi.
> > >
> > > Looking through the file lists for the at-spi package and the
> > > pyatspi package I think there are some files which appear in both
> > > packages. My question is, can at-spi and at-spi2 with pyatspi
> > > coexist on a system or should they be seen as a conflict? If they
> > > can coexist on the same system, which python bindings should take
> > > priority? IE. Should the python bindings in the at-spi package be
> > > removed and just pyatspi be installed?
> > As a packager for a distro you probably want to have the at-spi2
> > packages conflict with the at-spi ones.  Making the two coexist on a
> > system can be done, but it involves keeping everything at-spi2 or at-spi
> > related out of the normal paths, and then making them first in the path
> > when you want to run the alternate one with a bunch of enviroment
> > variables.  I do this for development purposes, and I think part of my
> > .fluxbox/startup file will explain what happens better than I can.
> > However I can think of a reasonable way to have this work with packages.
> >
> > # what version of at-spi to use
> > at_spi_version="1"
> >
> > if [ $at_spi_version != "2" ]
> > then
> > # if we are using at-spi
> > /usr/lib/at-spi/at-spi-registryd&
> >
> > else
> > # for at-spi2
> > export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/lib/
> > export PYTHONPATH=/opt/lib/python2.6/site-packages/
> > export PATH=/opt/bin:$PATH
> > export GI_TYPELIB_PATH=/opt/lib/girepository-1.0/
> > export GTK_PATH=/opt/lib/gtk-2.0/
> > export AT_SPI_VERSION="2"
> > #/opt/libexec/at-spi2-registryd&
> > fi
> >
> > Trev