On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 05:57:25PM +0200, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>> +#if defined (i386) && defined (SVR4)
>> + /*
>> + * PANIX returns DICOP standards based keycodes in using 106jp
>> + * keyboard. We need to remap some keys.
>> + */
>> + if(xf86Info.panix106 == TRUE){
>> + switch (scanCode) {
>> + case 0x56: scanCode = KEY_BSlash2; break; /* Backslash */
>> + case 0x5A: scanCode = KEY_NFER; break; /* No Kanji
>> Transfer*/ + case 0x5B: scanCode = KEY_XFER; break; /* Kanji
>> Tranfer */ + case 0x5C: scanCode = KEY_Yen; break; /* Yen curs
>> pgup */ + case 0x6B: scanCode = KEY_Left; break; /* Cur Left
>> */ + case 0x6F: scanCode = KEY_PgUp; break; /* Cur PageUp */ +
>> case 0x72: scanCode = KEY_AltLang; break; /* AltLang(right) */
>> + case 0x73: scanCode = KEY_RCtrl; break; /* not needed */ +
>> }
>> + } else
>> +#else /* i386 && SVR4 */
>> + {
>> + switch (scanCode) {
>> + case 0x5c: scanCode = KEY_KP_Equal; break; /* Keypad Equal */
>> + }
>> + }
>> +#endif /* !(i386 && SVR4) */
>> }
>>
>> else if (
>>
>>
>> I'll commit this (and the rest of the patch). Could someone test it
>> and let us know if it works correctly?
>
>Looking at the patch and xf86Events.c, I don't understand why this switch code
>is if'ed out for the i386/SVR4 case. Is that a special configuration for
>Japanese keyboards that don't have KPEQ?
It shouldn't be #if'd out for that case (I'll fix that), but the
i386/SVR4-specific case is for a platform where 0x5C (and some
other codes) is generated for other, Japanese-specific, keys.
Have you tested whether it fixes the KP_Equal problem you reported?
David
--
David Dawes
Founder/committer/developer The XFree86 Project
www.XFree86.org/~dawes
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
