On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 10:52:54AM -0500, Vladimir Dergachev wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Feb 2003, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 10:29:02PM +1100, Brad Hards wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 21:52, Zephaniah E\. Hull wrote: > > > > Something comes to mind, but to be blunt it is still a hack, and it > > > > could easily result in a system with no keyboard at all if X crashes. > > > > > > > > Throw in a fake event, that tells the keyboard driver to ignore > > > > everything from that input device until it receives the command again > > > > with a different value. > > > > > > > > I don't really like it, but at the same time I don't see anything overly > > > > better. > > > I don't think that anything you do on the event interface should affect the > > > keyboard interface. > > > > > > Why not a special "disable output' ioctl on the keyboard interface? > > > > Possibly quite feasible, however I don't know the details of the > > keyboard interface, but I suppose if nobody else cares to do this, > > then I suppose I will look into it. > > > > I think a while ago somebody on the kernel proposed a patch whereby any > device that had evdev opened was removed from sending events to the > console layer.
A nice idea, but I explained why that is /exceedingly/ dangerous a
message or two ago, I would not suggest such a patch.
Zephaniah E. Hull.
>
> best
>
> Vladimir Dergachev
--
1024D/E65A7801 Zephaniah E. Hull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
92ED 94E4 B1E6 3624 226D 5727 4453 008B E65A 7801
CCs of replies from mailing lists are requested.
<VOICE MODE=Pitr>
So, you are thinking am Communist ? Deal, Comerade !
</VOICE>
-- Chris on ASR.
msg00493/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
