Comment 4 for bug 1101836

Well Aron, my belief is that we have such a solution through the debian/postinst file in im-config. To know if there is a remaining issue that needs to be addressed - and how to address it - we need to know the exact nature of that issue.

* I think that 80im-switch is the only file that has to be removed, and
  that the other left-over im-switch files do not matter. Was the
  problem the user in question encountered caused by some other file(s)
  but 80im-switch?

* I think that all officially released versions of 80im-switch are
  automatically removed by debian/postinst in im-config. Was there a
  non-modified copy of 80im-switch left on the user's system?

Considering the problem described in bug 875435, unfortunately it's not unlikely that there are quite a few modified copies of 80im-switch out there. It should be noted that Osamu had to defend the code in debian/postinst in relation to Debian policies with respect to configuration files: http://bugs.debian.org/690212

It could be argued that /etc/X11/Xsession.d/80im-switch is not really a config file, and consequently that config file policies don't apply. Personally I think that's a reasonable standpoint in this case, and if so it could be motivated to drop the md5sum check. However, I suppose that such a change should not be Ubuntu specific, since 80im-switch is just as harmful on Debian after a transition to im-config.

Osamu, would it be possible to drop the md5sum check in debian/postinst?

@Sebastien: Subscribed you to this bug, since we had a similar discussion when you sponsored
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/im-config/0.19ubuntu1