On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On 12 July 2012 23:07, Keith Packard <[email protected]> wrote: >> Construct a unique filename based on the display name and the RMLVO >> values. If that file contains valid contents, use it. Otherwise, >> compile the keymap to that file and don't unlink it so that it will be >> re-used the next time the server runs. > > You need to do at least some rudimentary stat() work so that you'll > rebuild the keymap if the files it uses changes. Aside from that, > it's our best hope short of forking xkbcommon, adding back some of the > bits we removed as pointless, and smashing that into the server > (volunteers?), so, why not.
Not that I actually have the time to work on this, but I'd been thinking about xkbcommon lately. Do you think it's possible to build a compatibility layer around the current code? Either the compat code could live in the server or it could be an optional extra library shipped in xkbcommon. I'm not sure if the changes in xkbcommon are too deep to be able to build a keymap for current XKB or not. What do you think? It seems silly not to be making use of xkbcommon in X. -- Dan _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
