(In reply to Martin Whitaker from https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14476#73 ) > > As an aside, there do seem to bogus entries in the keyboards table. For > example: > > % setxkbmap -layout "tifinagh(phonetic)" > Error loading new keyboard description Thanks, I wasn't aware of that, only that we miss a lot of entries. (See https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15732#c2 ) [marja@cldrn_64 /]$ grep -r tifinagh usr/share/X11/xkb/symbols/* usr/share/X11/xkb/symbols/ma:// Clavier unicode tifinaghe de base réalisé par l'IRCAM (Institut Royal de la Culture Amazighe du Maroc) http://www.ircam.ma/ <snip> [marja@cldrn_64 /]$ grep 'xkb_symbols' /usr/share/X11/xkb/symbols/ma xkb_symbols "arabic" { xkb_symbols "french" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh-phonetic" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh-extended" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh-extended-phonetic" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh-alt" { xkb_symbols "tifinagh-alt-phonetic" { [marja@cldrn_64 /]$ So for tifinagh, keyboard.pm should maybe, instead of "fr,tifinagh(basic),ara(azerty)" have something like "ma(french),ma(tifinagh),ma(arabic)" (I'm not sure the original order should be kept, or whether that would be wrong) and fr tifinagh-phonetic something like: "ma(french),ma(tifinagh-phonetic),ma(arabic)" (and the extended and alt keyboard layouts should probably get entries, too) However, I don't feel like changing anything, now. All the changes (apart from the one for bug 7519 ) that I've made to keyboard.pm only turned out good because of educated guesses and luck. My fix for bug 7519 might turn out to be a disaster. I hope someone with a Mac will test it in a VM long before 6RC is released.
I think your guess is right and than on other hands, we'll have a hard time find a tester. So just commit your changes and close this BR. That'll fix at least a known error.
Keywords: (none) => PATCH
Assignee: bugsquad => marja11
Marja, you might also find /usr/share/X11/xkb/rules/xorg.lst helpful - it lists all the valid keyboard layout and variant combinations in a fairly readable way. There is a check() subroutine in the keyboard.pm module which looks to be designed to validate the keyboards table, but it has clearly not been used for a while, as it still refers to /usr/lib/X11/xkb/rules/xfree86.lst. I did try fixing that, but there are other files it tries to read that are also no longer present and don't have an obvious replacement.
(In reply to Thierry Vignaud from comment #1) > So just commit your changes and close this BR. Will do, sorry for having feared to break something that was already broken. (In reply to Martin Whitaker from comment #2) > Marja, you might also find /usr/share/X11/xkb/rules/xorg.lst helpful - it > lists all the valid keyboard layout and variant combinations in a fairly > readable way. Thanks, I didn't know that file. So instead of "ma(arabic)" I should have proposed "ma". And to put on top of yours & Pablo's patch for bug 14476, I understand now "fr,am,ara", ",tifinagh,azerty" should become "ma,ma,ma", "french,tifinagh," and "fr,am,ara", ",tifinagh-phonetic,azerty" should become "ma,ma,ma", "french,tifinagh-phonetic," Is that correct, or is there no need to repeat "ma" 3 times? > > There is a check() subroutine in the keyboard.pm module which looks to be > designed to validate the keyboards table, but it has clearly not been used > for a while, as it still refers to /usr/lib/X11/xkb/rules/xfree86.lst. I did > try fixing that, but there are other files it tries to read that are also no > longer present and don't have an obvious replacement. Thanks for your efforts. I understand that even for people who know Perl, our code is still a labyrinth ;-)
CC: (none) => pablo
(In reply to Marja van Waes from comment #3) > "ma,ma,ma", "french,tifinagh-phonetic," > > Is that correct, or is there no need to repeat "ma" 3 times? > I should have looked at attachment 8131 [details] "srp,srp", "basic,latin", So, yes, repeating is apparently needed :-)
hello, > "fr,am,ara", ",tifinagh,azerty" > should become > "ma,ma,ma", "french,tifinagh," fr(basic) and me(french) are the same (ma(french) just includes fr(basic)) same for ar(azerty) and ma(arabic). So, using one or the other is the same. However, I find "fr" and "ara(azerty)" easier to understand > Is that correct, or is there no need to repeat "ma" 3 times? There are indeed *3* keyboard layouts stacked, one in latin letters, one in tifinagh letters, one in arabic letters. > > There is a check() subroutine in the keyboard.pm module which looks to be > > designed to validate the keyboards table, but it has clearly not been used > > for a while, a quite simple check would be try to load the keyboard layout (that is, do a shell call to: setxkbmap "$layout" -option "$option" if the return code is a failure, display an error message telling the $layout $option combination is broken. at the end of trying all layouts the original layout has to be loaded (the current values can be retrieve with: "setxkbmap -query"
(In reply to Pablo Saratxaga from comment #5) > hello, > > > "fr,am,ara", ",tifinagh,azerty" > > should become > > "ma,ma,ma", "french,tifinagh," > > fr(basic) and me(french) are the same (ma(french) just includes fr(basic)) > same for ar(azerty) and ma(arabic). > > So, using one or the other is the same. > However, I find "fr" and "ara(azerty)" easier to understand I agree that they are easier to understand. I had seen the includes, but remembered when we had the ⬠added. If Morocco would decide to have a dedicated symbol for their currency, it would then end up in the ma layouts. However, we can still adjust it _if_ that ever happens at all, so let's just do what you prefer, and only switch from "am" to "ma" for tifinagh.
commit 6bc379e2f3884590878644bd7b92a6a2f17e846b Author: Marja van Waes <marja@...> Date: Sat Jul 9 22:34:16 2016 +0200 Last fix for two bogus keyboards table entries (mga#18862) o after Pablo already fixed a bunch of them. --- Commit Link: http://gitweb.mageia.org/software/drakx-kbd-mouse-x11/commit/?id=6bc379e2f3884590878644bd7b92a6a2f17e846b
fixed in git
Resolution: (none) => FIXEDStatus: NEW => RESOLVED