Signed-off-by: Ping Cheng
---
src/wcmUSB.c | 17 -
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/wcmUSB.c b/src/wcmUSB.c
index 689378a..017e3a0 100644
--- a/src/wcmUSB.c
+++ b/src/wcmUSB.c
@@ -1025,7 +1025,22 @@ static int usbParseKeyEvent(WacomCommonPtr co
We borrowed _TAP_ for 2FGT Tablet PC support when MT protocol was
not available (before kernel 2.6.30 was released). MT support in
the kernel is getting stable now. To move Tablet PC to MT format,
we face two issues:
1. USB Tablet PC 1FGT devices will not emit BTN_TOOL_FINGER event
since it is a t
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
> What limitation or benefit do we offer to application by not sending
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>>>
What limitation or benefit do we offer to application by not sending
or sending DOUBLETAP? I think I fundamentally missed
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 04:01:07PM -0800, Jason Gerecke wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Adam Bark wrote:
> >
> > I figure the code is 0.10.10 so until it hits 1.x I won't assume
> > anything. As for Favux's comment you don't have to update immediately
> > it's only just been checked in s
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>>
>>> What limitation or benefit do we offer to application by not sending
>>> or sending DOUBLETAP? I think I fundamentally missed this part.
>>
>> Benefit of acting like touchscreen: Works
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Adam Bark wrote:
>
> I figure the code is 0.10.10 so until it hits 1.x I won't assume
> anything. As for Favux's comment you don't have to update immediately
> it's only just been checked in so won't be in a release for a little while.
>
Assuming 0.x will have uns
> would something like:
>xsetwacom get RelWUp
>"RelWUp is obsolete. Please use RelWheelUp instead"
>
> be acceptable? A mapping table like this is easy to maintain.
Sure, good idea! That would give folks at least something to work
with. So I'm definitely in favor of that.
I know you kn
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>
>> What limitation or benefit do we offer to application by not sending
>> or sending DOUBLETAP? I think I fundamentally missed this part.
>
> Benefit of acting like touchscreen: Works with xf86-input-evdev and
> any pre-existing touchscreen a
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
Been out of action with a cold. Trying slowing to get back online.
>>>
>>
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 01:10:21PM -0600, Favux ... wrote:
> I for one am not excited by the proposed changes. I just finished
> updating most of the xsetwacom scripts to be xf86-input-wacom
> compatible and going through that again does not appeal. I've had
> enough folks bewildered or complaini
I was reviewing pressure code and thinking about pressure issue
reported on linuxwacom-discuss. I noticed we do these steps (thanks
to recent refactor, its easy to copy&paste now :-) ):
filtered.pressure = normalizePressure(priv, &filtered);
filtered.buttons = setPressureButton(priv, &filtered);
On 03/02/11 19:10, Favux ... wrote:
> I for one am not excited by the proposed changes. I just finished
> updating most of the xsetwacom scripts to be xf86-input-wacom
> compatible and going through that again does not appeal. I've had
> enough folks bewildered or complaining about the switch fro
I for one am not excited by the proposed changes. I just finished
updating most of the xsetwacom scripts to be xf86-input-wacom
compatible and going through that again does not appeal. I've had
enough folks bewildered or complaining about the switch from
ClickForce to Threshold.
I definitely see
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
>
> This series will be more controversial than the last 8 but let's see. The
> patches here change the xsetwacom parameter names into something that's
> slighly more self-explanatory.
>
> Yes, we know what "RelWDn" means, but I'm sure my great
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Ping Cheng wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Chris Bagwell wrote:
>>> Been out of action with a cold. Trying slowing to get back online.
>>
>> Sorry to hear that. Hope you are getting "warmed up" here
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 03:13:43PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
> FAQ:
> - Won't this break user's scripts?
> Yes, such is life.
Any chance we can also accept the old RelWDn, and leave it undocumented.
That way it won't break user scripts ... :)
Thanks,
GI
--
Top Ten New Intel Slogans For T
17 matches
Mail list logo
