On Sun, Mar 23, 2003 at 02:00:04AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> I'm just dropping ideas. I might analyze the situation to have fun later
> with more free time, for now i'm only actualy worried about a usable
> interface for xfree86.
Nothing against ideas. But please post them in a mail separate
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 09:47:26AM +0100, M. Gerards wrote:
>
> Currently I'm working on a XKB plugin for the console client. Some months ago
> Marcus and I had a discussion about this. Marcus spoke about a repeater for the
> keyboard from which X can read input. I can design a protocol to speak
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 02:33:57PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 01:02:05PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > but if there are 2 projects sharing a resource that need coordination,
> > someone should be coordinating them.
>
> If that's your dogma, go ahead. But don't ask
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 01:02:05PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> but if there are 2 projects sharing a resource that need coordination,
> someone should be coordinating them.
If that's your dogma, go ahead. But don't ask me about the problems that
occur when you put a decision on how to do someth
> > However, the console client mouse driver could provide /dev/mouse.
>
> there's a translator providing /dev/mouse already, what is wrong with it?
It is just for X. The driver for the console will emulate xterm behaviour
AFAIK. It will also be able to copy text IIRC(so just like gpm).
__
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 02:40:02AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 01:35:30AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > and the Xserver is also accessing VGA and keyboard directly? looks like
> > an unnecessary code duplication to me.
>
> What code do you think is duplicated?
Citeren Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > The keyboard is accessed directly, too. There is a simple driver in the
> > kernel though so the interrupt handling is done inside the kernel.
>
> and the Xserver is also accessing VGA and keyboard directly? looks like
> an unnecessary code duplicat
On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 01:35:30AM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > The keyboard is accessed directly, too. There is a simple driver in the
> > kernel though so the interrupt handling is done inside the kernel.
>
> and the Xserver is also accessing VGA and keyboard directly? looks like
> an unnece
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 185450 missing some sort of replacement for virtual terminal ioctl's
Bug#185450: missing virtual terminal ioctl's
Changed Bug title.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug
retitle 185450 missing some sort of replacement for virtual terminal ioctl's
thanks
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 10:41:05PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > >
> > > It needs to be cooperative, but it can be simple. It also can assume trust
> > > between the communication partners (ie proper behavio
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 10:14:47PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > > This bug is a will-not-fix or a non-bug. See also the savannah task
> > > > database, I am sure I have one open for that.
>
> I can't see an item in Console's task sublist:
>
> http://savannah.gnu.org/pm/task.php?group_projec
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 09:56:41PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> "Standard" is a bit far stretched. We are talking about a solution that is
> shared by BSD and Linux, I think, which are both monolithic Unix like
> kernels, and thus have a different understanding about how things should
> wor
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 08:47:47PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > We will not implement those ioctls, and they will certainly not be
> > implemented in the terminal server (or magic for that matter).
> >
> > It's also unrelated to a console server.
> >
> > The issue is between the vga console cl
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 03:02:58PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> You must have ignored my previous reply on this issue.
of course not! I understood that VT_ACTIVATE is needed by the Xserver,
sorry if i understood wrong.
> We will not implement those ioctls, and they will certainly not be
>
On Wed, Mar 19, 2003 at 02:22:33PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> of course, this only makes sense in the context of a configured
> console server:
You must have ignored my previous reply on this issue.
We will not implement those ioctls, and they will certainly not be
implemented in the terminal
Package: hurd
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-03-19
Severity: wishlist
the VT_* ioctls for manipulating virtual terminals, defined in
for GNU/Linux, are not implemented on GNU/Hurd.
for a description on what these should do, see the GNU/Linux Console
Programming HOWTO:
http://www.ibiblio.org
16 matches
Mail list logo
