On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:40:18AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 14:25 -0700, Barton C Massey wrote: > > > > I unfortunately don't have the hardware in question to test with. This X > > > configuration is of course perfectly valid. > > I copied it straight out of the manpage so I'd hope so :> > > > Give me a day or so to check all this out. I don't think > > looking at the X behavior is too useful: too many place that > > the direction can be swapped. Instead, look which way the > > bits coming directly out of evdev point. > > I can do that (early next week), but I don't have any other devices to > test with. Can provide a dump. > > > IIRC I set things > > up so that positive X was the same as on other evdev > > devices. Is the supplied X config swapping the X axis with > > this line? > > > > > > Option "evBits" "+1-2" > > No idea! I just copied it out of the manpage from evdev(4)
As the xf86-input-evdev maintainer, I can tell you quite firmly that the
answer is a solid no.
However I can also tell you that I may infact have the behavior
backwards in the driver. :)
Yell, scream, and shout if that's the case.
Zephaniah E. Hull.
--
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.
If I have trouble installing Linux, something is wrong. Very wrong.
-- Linus Torvalds on l-k.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
