On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 21:26 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 20:18 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Could it be applied or commented on please? > > Well, since you already reported this upstream, comments (and application) > usually should go upstream too. I didn't see any of this happens so yeah I > left it fall through the cracks. > I'll push a package integrating your patch but I still have a question: how do you make sure a11y is not enabled if you don't want it? Relying on the absence of AT_SPI_COMMAND doesn't look robust (for example it's installed here because it's a dependency of evolution but I certainly don't need or want it).
Regards, -- Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
