[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#652078: libatk-adaptor: gnome-shell fails to read atk bridge location - too old libatk-adaptor



Package: libatk-adaptor
Version: 2.0.2-1
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,
Starting gnome-shell from experimental, 3.2.1-7+b1 :

(gnome-shell:5328): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_variant_get_bytestring: assertion `g_variant_is_of_type (value, G_VARIANT_TYPE_BYTESTRING)' failed

** (gnome-shell:5328): WARNING **: Accessibility: invalid module path (NULL)

** (gnome-shell:5328): WARNING **: Accessibility: error loading the atk-bridge. Although the accessibility on the system is enabled and clutter accessibility is also enabled, accessibility support on GNOME Shell will not work

This boils down to gnome-shell expecting newest libatk-adaptor which provide org.a11y.atspi atk-bridge-location as an
array of bytes instead of a string (type="ay").

This changes happend in at-spi-atk upstream at 2.2.0.

Could libatk-adaptor be upgraded to 2.2.0 or 2.3.0 in experimental ?

Best regards,
Alban


-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-rc5test0-00038-g373da0a (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages libatk-adaptor depends on:
ii  dconf-gsettings-backend [gsettings-backend]  0.10.0-3
ii  libatk1.0-0                                  2.2.0-2
ii  libatspi2.0-0                                2.0.2-2
ii  libc6                                        2.13-23
ii  libdbus-1-3                                  1.5.8-1
ii  libglib2.0-0                                 2.30.2-4
ii  libice6                                      2:1.0.7-2
ii  libsm6                                       2:1.2.0-2
ii  libx11-6                                     2:1.4.4-4

libatk-adaptor recommends no packages.

libatk-adaptor suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information



Reply to: