Re: Three problems with Chinput

On Fri, 2 May 2003, James Su wrote: > Then, how do you think about the relationship between the linux kernel > and close sourced modules, like NVidia kernel driver? Don't they obay > those two rules? Ha! You don't want to use binary-only kernel module as an example because it is a beast of its

Re: Three problems with Chinput

On Thu, 1 May 2003, Yu Guanghui wrote: > Hi > I didn't see any violation. SCIM is LGPL, the upsteam author (Su Zhe) > provides > the source. The upstream author also writes the pinyin module, and decides not > to release the source. Pinyin module should not be considered as part of SCIM. > It's

Re: Three problems with Chinput

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Stefan Baums wrote: > ... > > I don't like the fact that SCIM's pinyin module is non-free, and > that SCIM seems to be more of a moving target, under heavy > development. Normally this is just a moral choice. However in this particular case I think there's more than that. By

Re: Three problems with Chinput

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Stefan Baums wrote: >1. Chinput does not play nice with xterm. When I open an xterm > with chinput running in the background, xterm and chinput > together will consume ca. 20% CPU time doing nothing at This reminded me that I used to have the same problem wit