On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:35:20AM -0700, Stephen Powell wrote: > Thanks for the update on mouse sharing in newer > kernels. I didn't realize that this support had been > added. That does take away part of my supporting > argument for configuring X to use gpm.
It was a very nice improvement. > I realize that PS/2 mice were not intended to be hot > swapped, but "stuff happens". Sometimes the connector > is loose and falls out, sometimes a mischievous > co-worker unplugs it as a practical joke, sometimes > the mouse fails, sometimes someone trips over the > cord, sometimes the dog chews on it, sometimes an > inquisitive toddler unplugs it, etc. Being able to > recover from these things without requiring a reboot > (or at least restarting the X server) is a nice > feature, one that gpm provides. For a PS/2 port, there is NOTHING software can do to recover. The hardware on the majority of PCs requires a reset for the PS/2 port to come back to life. gpm is of no help here. X does mouse handling just as well as gpm does. > Well, as Scotty of Star Trek fame says, "The more they > overtink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the > drain." (Star Trek III: The Search for Spock) But > then again, you could make that argument for the new > kernel support for mouse sharing too. Yes, adding > another layer of software also adds another thing that > can go wrong. The key is to make the benefits greater > than the cost. I can only say that I have used gpm on > several different machines under several different > releases of Linux, and I have never had a bit of > trouble with it. In some cases I seem to remember it > allowing the mouse to work when X couldn't drive it > directly (the "fups2" protocol came to the rescue). > And it has saved my hindquarters when the mouse got > unplugged somehow. /dev/input/mice actually has the kernel convert all known mouse formats to one protocol as far as I know, so all those mouse protocol issues are gone too. > I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't > use the console. I, for one, use it a lot. But even > it it's true, I don't see why a device driver for a > device that is present on the system shouldn't be > installed. Should you not install serial port support > because most people don't use the serial port? It > won't HARM people who DON'T use the console, will it? > We're talking about basic hardware support here, > something that many applications can use -- not an > application. Please reconsider. gpm is NOT a driver. It is a tool that can use the mouse interface in the kernel and do useful things with the terminal. Other programs could do the same if they wanted to. it is not a driver though. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
