Bug#1008481: Add SDL_IM_MODULE to fcitx4 and fcitx5

[Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>]

Hi,

These bugs seem somewhat similar:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=990316
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1008481

Please check these.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shengjing Zhu <zhsj@debian.org>
> Reply-To: Shengjing Zhu <zhsj@debian.org>, 1008481@bugs.debian.org
> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
> Subject: Bug#1008481: Add SDL_IM_MODULE to fcitx4 and fcitx5
> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2022 15:06:22 +0800
> 
> Source: im-config
> Version: 0.50-2
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-Cc: zhsj@debian.org
> 
> Origin from
> https://salsa.debian.org/input-method-team/im-config/-/merge_requests/14
> 
> I asked the author to submit a bug first. But we haven't received so far.
> 
> sdl2 supports reading SDL_IM_MODULE, but the supported value is only fcitx,
> otherwise it uses ibus.
> 
> Fcitx support in sdl2 package:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=881042
> Upstream code:
> https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL/blob/120c76c8/src/core/linux/SDL_ime.c#L46-L49
> 
> So adding SDL_IM_MODULE=fcitx to fcitx4 and fcitx5 is reasonable.
> 

So question is "Does sdl upstream recommend turning on IM_MODULE as default?

Also, I am a bit concerned to add features for external program fearng some
regressions.  Please explain this has no negative side effects.

Can we resolve this by adding README for some special case situation.

Osamu