Arch Linux User Repository

若遇到不能启动的问题, 请检查 .desktop 文件是否有 override

今日发现一个问题（严格来说或许不能将其定义为 BUG）。

问题现象

点击搜索框，搜索结果会闪现，无法聚焦。

系统环境：

archlinux
WM：awesome WM
version：awesome v4.3 (Too long) 
• Compiled against Lua 5.3.6 (running with Lua 5.3) 
• D-Bus support: ✔ 
• execinfo support: ✔ 
• xcb-randr version: 1.6 
• LGI version: 0.9.2

WM规避方式 ：

该问题应与鼠标焦点策略存在关联：搜索弹出框疑似响应了 mouse::enter 事件。当对相关事件进行注释处理并将 focus 设置为 false 时，弹出框能够正常使用。以下为目前所采取的临时解决方法：

仅添加“focus=false”，弹出框会处于悬停状态，但当鼠标移动至结果选项列表时，弹框便会消失。若不添加“focus=false”，则弹窗会闪现。

{
    rule = { class = "wechat" },
    properties = {
        screen = 1,
        focus=false,
        tag = awful.util.tagnames[5]
    }
},

在同时禁用以下代码段后，搜索功能恢复正常。

client.connect_signal("mouse::enter", function(c)
    c:emit_signal("request::activate", "mouse_enter", {raise = false})
end)

该问题目前暂未在其他 qt 程序中被发现。期望以上信息能够提供一定的帮助。

awsomewm 相关事件信息：

mouse::enter（窗口）：当鼠标指针进入窗口边界时触发。
mouse::enter（小部件）：当鼠标指针进入小部件边界时触发。
mouse::leave（窗口）：当鼠标指针离开窗口边界时触发。
mouse::leave（小部件）：当鼠标指针离开小部件边界时触发。
mouse::press（窗口和小部件）：当鼠标按钮在窗口或小部件上按下时触发。
mouse::release（窗口和小部件）：当鼠标按钮在窗口或小部件上释放时触发。
mouse::move（窗口和小部件）：当鼠标在窗口或小部件上移动时触发。

从 4.0.1.11-1 更新到了 4.0.1.11-2，无法启动微信，没有/usr/bin/wechat 程序，降级至4.0.1.11-1可恢复；评论区只看到了争吵，没人关心如何解决问题？

Someone in the mailing list wrote:

it's quite sus that such great effort was taken just for the sake of being a maintainer (which is a non-paid volunteer role) of some package. i think some sort of security audit should take place to fully clarify this situation, because such pattern strongly remind some sort of social engineering hack attempt, for example for including some unwanted payload to one of "concurrenting" package

A coalition of monopolists and dictators, GOOD JOB!!!

@Keep-Silence An alternative way is provided here: https://github.com/devome/wechat-bin?tab=readme-ov-file#1-%E6%8E%A8%E8%8D%90%E4%BD%BF%E7%94%A8-paru

@pm3843 I can understand that you are trying to avoid the splitting of the community, but someone does not care. They is just making more and more mistakes trying to justify their wrong decision.

这场闹剧也该结束了，无论是wechat还是wechat-bin都没有关系，只希望@Kimiblock自娱自乐的时候不要影响其他包正常使用。

This farce should end. It doesn’t matter whether it is wechat or wechat-bin. I just hope that when @Kimiblock enjoying himself, he won’t affect other packages.

@pm3843 君子坦荡荡，小人长戚戚

不用做这些无意义的争执了。 PM（@Muflone）只想结束这场闹剧。他不在乎wechat-bin和wechat的区别。他已经认可了@Kimiblock的做法。 如果你个人想要一个纯净版的wechat-bin，使用历史PKGBUILD自己安装。或者等这个包孤儿接手维护。 没别的了

There is no point in making these meaningless struggles. PM (@Muflone) just wants to end this farce. He doesn't care about the difference between wechat-bin and wechat. He has already approved of what @Kimiblock did. If you personally want a pure version of wechat-bin, use the historical PKGBUILD to install it yourself.Or wait for this package orphan to take over maintenance. Nothing else

Still only a minor issue (in the upstream desktop file) was reported and it was promptly fixed in less than one day.

All the rest is noise, with zero technical arguments. The past history is irrelevant, only the current package counts and Kimiblock has quickly fixed all the reported issues.

Now you have wechat and wechat-bin and I cannot read even a single technical issue to solve.

Stop this useless spam and provide valid reports if any, or else keep your personal PKGBUILD elsewhere if you don't want to use this package. Stop asking for maintainer change, this won't happen until there are SERIOUS issues or prolonged maintainer absence

@Muflone

what Antiz changed and written was the abuse of replaces. The new package has zero replaces nor conflicts, so there's nothing to change here.

Please read again Antiz's note.

This is lame. wechat-bin changes hand and that renders replaces/conflicts unnecessary. Wouldn't you say?

What is the compelling reason that Kimiblock had to take over this package instead of just minding the one he already manages? The flawed AUR guideline as demonstrated in this case that there can be no duplicate package? Just look at the discussion page of AUR wiki page and see how many issues are there pending and let's start a conversation and add this to the list. Essentially the guideline safeguards the first maintainer to a unreasonable extent and if users don't like it users have no choice but to swallow it. wechat-bin garnered +50 votes in about the same time period as wechat did and those votes should just be tossed away because the current flawed guideline says so? If you look at the same guideline there's little rules imposed on PM that when PM like Kimiblock misbehaves there's little to nothing users can do.

What is this your discussion for? What is the benefit? What you reported as broken?

To allow voices be heard and not let guidelines be geared towards first maintainer who happens to first grab the name of a package. What's wrong with duplicate packages when there's vote and popularity mechanism out there and users are free to choose whatever they want?

As far I can read: nothing, only personal dislike towards Kimiblock.

You need to spend more time on this.

1. His action speaks for himself. He packaged this in an inferior way and upon feedback by users that application cannot be started he just quoted the BS vanilla. Seriously? If you were not present we can all rest assured that he'd let this rot as is.

2. He made the replace/conflict change.

3. He requested the deletion of other package in rival with his.

4. Read all the linked feedback/comment by AUR community users about their opinion on this matter.

All indication points to power grip of this maintainer and these are unacceptable things happening in too short a time frame to be excused. This maintainer at the minimum should be granted a timeout.

Anyhow you seem to have your mind set, so be it. Life goes on. Happy new year.

My final proposal:

1.1 Strip Kimiblock from wechat-bin, allow the original maintainers to take it back;

1.2 Or allow original maintainers to take a new name and not to be considered duplicate and rejected. There's enough room for two.

2.0 Let users' opinion be heard and not ignored/suppressed.

@pm3843 what Antiz changed and written was the abuse of replaces.

The new package has zero replaces nor conflicts, soo there's nothing to change here.

What is this your discussion for? What is the benefit? What you reported as broken?

As far I can read: nothing, only personal dislike towards Kimiblock.

Until objective reasons are raised and the refusal from Kimiblock to fix them happen, this package will remain and there will not be allowed duplicated packages.

@Muflone Could you read this comment by another PM @Antiz? This PM even took the extra step of stepping in and intervened here and here by reverting Kimiblock's change. This should not be taken lightly and is the common sense way to deal with the situation regardless of how subjective minds interpret the AUR guidelines.

The way @Kimiblock has acted so far(unwillingness to improve/collaborate, malicious takeover of other packages) has a chilling effect on the AUR community, folks are taking notice and frankly his action has cost him his entire credibility with me and most likely the 50+ users who voted for this package in the past. Just look at the most upvoted wechat package comment section they are preparing in the case of a hostile take over they'd need to retreat to github.

Best solution at the moment, echoed by following users: Let the users vote on whatever package they choose to use and free wechat-bin from Kimiblock.

ernest etoyz timefaker JoveYu envolution pr0m1x wszqkzqk Keep-Silence