Currently scim-bridge is incapable of working with multilib because its communication protocol makes incorrect assumptions about data size. The protocol must be fixed. Let's try to get this done before FC6test1 development freeze on June 7th.
I'm sorry to say that I can't afford to makeup all things by the due time. We must give up at least one thing. This problem will be solved in scim-bridge-0.2, which now I'm writing. But I can't prepare this by the begining of June; It will be released at the end of June at the earliest. There is another way to solve this, that is, makeup temporary communication protocol in scim-bridge-0.1.8. I can makeup this in one week or so. The problem is that the release of scim-bridge-0.2 will be delaied by such a work. (Scim-bridge-0.2 will be stable and more memory efficient. I would like to release this as soon as possible) Anyway, there is not so much time left for FC6-test1. We must make a decision as soon as possible.
At last, I've found that it's easy to fix that problem in scim-bridge-0.1.* branch. Although I haven't tested this (as I'm too sleepy and tired now), 64bit binary of it must be able to communicate with i386 applications. You can get scim-bridge-0.1.8 from here: http://homepage2.nifty.com/shibatama/garage/scim-bridge-0.1.8.tar.gz
At last, I've succeeded in add multilib support for scim-bridge. :) There are a few changes from the previous post, please re-download again if you've already got it. You can get scim-bridge-0.1.8 from here: http://homepage2.nifty.com/shibatama/garage/scim-bridge-0.1.8.tar.gz
Wow, that was quick, thank you! It is absolutely critical that scim-bridge works in FC6, so we need to get more users testing it *now*. So I plan on rebuilding the entire scim* against libstdc++.so.6 in FC5 and pushing it as a FC5 update candidate, with scim-bridge enabled by default. If testers indicate that it works well, then we will push it as an official FC5 update. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Core/Schedule Here is our the FC6 development schedule. We would need scim-bridge by maybe July 1st if we want it to be in FC6. Please let us know how we can help you complete scim-bridge-0.2 before that time. What are the key features or improvements coming between 0.1.8 and 0.2?
Thanks, Dairiki-san: that is great!
> We would need scim-bridge by maybe > July 1st if we want it to be in FC6. Please let us know how we can help you > complete scim-bridge-0.2 before that time. It could be possible, but difficult. Maybe it could be tough job. \(x_x)/ > What are the key features or improvements coming between 0.1.8 and 0.2?? ScimBridge-0.1.* use too many threads, which make it difficult to read and unstable in some cases. On the other hand, ScimBridge-0.2 will use only GUI thread, so that it won't cause conflictions between different threads. I think that's might be such a serious problem. Because you can upgrade from ScimBridge-0.1.8 to ScimBridge-0.2 without pain. Just like the transition from ScimBridge-0.1.7 to ScimBridge-0.1.8; They can be coexist on the same system at the same time. The old processes continue to use ScimBridge-0.1.7, while the newly-invoked-processes use ScimBridge-0.1.8. When there are no clients for ScimBridge-0.1.7, the old agent will gone. (Did you notice that?)