Quoting Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 02:49:33PM +0100, M. Gerards wrote: > > The first problem is the scancode to keycod translation. At the moment I've > > > hardcoded this translation (XKB also works like this.). I'm not happy with > this > > because this will cause problems for exotic keyboards. I'm thinking abut a > > > configuration file for this so set 1 and set 2 can be used and even some > other > > sets I don't know. > > How does X do it? Does it expect the keycodes from a low level driver? If > that is the case, we can add low level drivers too (imagine modules which > just load a single conversion routine, which you are expected to load before > the xkb driver).
AFAIK it can convert scancodes itself and receive keycodes when they are available. I think it will covert scancodes to keycodes itself most of the time. > > Another XKB limitation is the Action structure. It is only 7 bytes big, so > it's > > can't be used for strings like I hoped. > > If you are not going to use the XKB code from X (are you?), you can just > support arbitrary long action bytes. Or is there a need to be compatible to > their binary data structures? I guess the question is if you support xkb or > the compiled format. I only support the compiled format. When a user wants to use the XKB format the external xkbcomp program can be used to compile the keymap. This action data structure can't be modified without losing compatibility. ------------- Marco Gerards _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
