On 07/28/2009 09:28 PM, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 16:56:51 28.07.2009 UTC-07 when w41...@gmail.com did gyre and
gimble:
w I'm wondering about the connection from terminal to server, and how
w much bandwidth would be typical for such a setting...
Have a look at network
Being strictly an amateur programmer, I've always wondered how many
people/institutions actually use X for remote display the way it was
designed to be used.
Quite a lot. In universities in crowded city centers, it is quite
common to have students work on (fan-less) X terminals, with a large
On 07/28/2009 10:18 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Being strictly an amateur programmer, I've always wondered how many
people/institutions actually use X for remote display the way it was
designed to be used.
Quite a lot. In universities in crowded city centers, it is quite
common to have
Twas brillig at 16:56:51 28.07.2009 UTC-07 when w41...@gmail.com did gyre and
gimble:
w I'm wondering about the connection from terminal to server, and how
w much bandwidth would be typical for such a setting. (I'm assuming
w that college students would spent substantial time watching
On 07/26/2009 01:56 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
David Moffatt wrote:
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer entirely. Let the OS deal with
walt wrote:
On 07/26/2009 01:56 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
David Moffatt wrote:
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer entirely. Let the
walt schrieb:
On 07/26/2009 01:56 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
David Moffatt wrote:
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer entirely. Let
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer entirely. Let the OS deal with that in its
own manner.
Simpler is better?
(Please flame/reply to
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:06:41 -0700
David Moffatt david.moff...@access-company.com wrote:
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer
David Moffatt wrote:
Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -- X key
codes and keyboards with 248 keys.
Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -- Symbol
problem out of the X layer entirely. Let the OS deal with that in its
own manner.
X already
10 matches
Mail list logo
