On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:16:31PM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-26-10 at 12:44 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > A 'filter' cares about a key or two, and might even want to remove it
> > from the stream, rfkill is a good example.
>
> The patch introduces two different features that
On 10/26/07, Zephaniah E. Hull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:37:34AM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > > We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
> > > text console. The current
On Fri, 2007-26-10 at 12:44 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> A 'filter' cares about a key or two, and might even want to remove it
> from the stream, rfkill is a good example.
The patch introduces two different features that work nicely together
but, by no means have to be used together.
1) set
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:37:34AM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
> > text console. The current solution sucks for things like rfkill.
> >
> > I'm not convinced
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:37:34AM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
text console. The current solution sucks for things like rfkill.
I'm not convinced that Ryan's
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:16:31PM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Fri, 2007-26-10 at 12:44 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
A 'filter' cares about a key or two, and might even want to remove it
from the stream, rfkill is a good example.
The patch introduces two different features that work
On 10/26/07, Zephaniah E. Hull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 01:37:34AM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
text console. The current solution
On Fri, 2007-26-10 at 12:44 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
A 'filter' cares about a key or two, and might even want to remove it
from the stream, rfkill is a good example.
The patch introduces two different features that work nicely together
but, by no means have to be used together.
1) set
On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
> text console. The current solution sucks for things like rfkill.
>
> I'm not convinced that Ryan's fix is any better, but just saying that X
> should open the
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:33:08PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
> > > are other applications also seeing the
On Wed, 2007-24-10 at 11:35 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
We need a way to, at the absolute minimum, unbind the keyboard from the
text console. The current solution sucks for things like rfkill.
I'm not convinced that Ryan's fix is any better, but just saying that X
should open the
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 11:33:08PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
are other applications also seeing the same
On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Ryan Lortie wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
> > are other applications also seeing the same keypresses, it just does
> > not want keypresses stolen from it.
>
>
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
> are other applications also seeing the same keypresses, it just does
> not want keypresses stolen from it.
Right. This is exactly the problem. The current grab API
On 10/23/07, Ryan Lortie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 09:21 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Priority/filter idea is different matter. I don't think it is a giood
> > solution. There will always be an "arms race", new applications would
> > like to get in front of the queue
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 09:21 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Priority/filter idea is different matter. I don't think it is a giood
> solution. There will always be an "arms race", new applications would
> like to get in front of the queue all the time and it will be hard to
> manage. X should just
Hi Ryan,
On 9/28/07, Ryan Lortie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> I have been working on a more flexible system for blocking the delivery
> of input events to other agents in the system.
>
> My approach is basically summed up as follows:
>
> - split the current purpose of input_handle
Hi Ryan,
On 9/28/07, Ryan Lortie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I have been working on a more flexible system for blocking the delivery
of input events to other agents in the system.
My approach is basically summed up as follows:
- split the current purpose of input_handle into two
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 09:21 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Priority/filter idea is different matter. I don't think it is a giood
solution. There will always be an arms race, new applications would
like to get in front of the queue all the time and it will be hard to
manage. X should just keep
On 10/23/07, Ryan Lortie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 09:21 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Priority/filter idea is different matter. I don't think it is a giood
solution. There will always be an arms race, new applications would
like to get in front of the queue all the
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
are other applications also seeing the same keypresses, it just does
not want keypresses stolen from it.
Right. This is exactly the problem. The current grab API
On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Tue, 2007-23-10 at 14:10 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
No, rfkill want to see keypresses, period. It does not care if there
are other applications also seeing the same keypresses, it just does
not want keypresses stolen from it.
Right.
On Tue, 2007-03-07 at 12:45 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> We just want a more flexible approach then what we are already using[0].
>
> I'll see about writing something up when I get back to my computers[1]
> and have things set back up[2].
>
> Zephaniah E. Hull.
>
> 0: EVIOCGRAB.
> 1: The
On Tue, 2007-03-07 at 12:45 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
We just want a more flexible approach then what we are already using[0].
I'll see about writing something up when I get back to my computers[1]
and have things set back up[2].
Zephaniah E. Hull.
0: EVIOCGRAB.
1: The night of
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:45:55PM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> Not really, what happens when the user presses alt-F1?
Well, if the console is switched to medium raw or raw mode, nothing
happens.
> A way to tell the kernel that events from a given input device should
> not go to the
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:40:31AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:40:31AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 12:45:55PM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
Not really, what happens when the user presses alt-F1?
Well, if the console is switched to medium raw or raw mode, nothing
happens.
A way to tell the kernel that events from a given input device should
not go to the console
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:40:31AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Like I said I
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:40:31AM -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Like I said I would love if
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > >
> > > Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the
> > > device at all.
> >
> >
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >
> > Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the
> > device at all.
>
> We have to disable the legacy input handlers somehow, not doing so
> simply
*googles briefly for rfkill-input, looks for his brown paper bag*
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:12, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > Hi Zephaniah,
> > >
> > > On
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:12, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Zephaniah,
> >
> > On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > > EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
> > > multiple
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Zephaniah,
>
> On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> > EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
> > multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
> > straight
Hi Zephaniah,
On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
> EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
> multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
> straight from the event device while xf86-input-evdev is getting events
> from the
Hi Zephaniah,
On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
straight from the event device while xf86-input-evdev is getting events
from the same
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Zephaniah,
On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
straight from the
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:12, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Zephaniah,
On Saturday 09 June 2007 04:48, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
multiple requests to make
*googles briefly for rfkill-input, looks for his brown paper bag*
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:12, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:07:13AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Hi Zephaniah,
On Saturday 09
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the
device at all.
We have to disable the legacy input handlers somehow, not doing so
simply isn't an
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:35:05AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 01:23, Zephaniah E. Hull wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:19:59AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
Like I said I would love if xf86-input-evdev did not grab the
device at all.
We have to
EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
straight from the event device while xf86-input-evdev is getting events
from the same device.
Here is the least invasive patch I could think of, it changes the
EVIOCGRAB is nice and very useful, however over time I've gotten
multiple requests to make it possible for applications to get events
straight from the event device while xf86-input-evdev is getting events
from the same device.
Here is the least invasive patch I could think of, it changes the
44 matches
Mail list logo
