On Sat, Jun 16, Mike A. Harris wrote:
>I find it very odd indeed with IBM's big voice of open source
>praise, yada yada, and what Lou has said in the past, that there
>would be any question at all of wether it would be open source or
>not. Isn't big blue behind open source? Or is it just for
>
>I find it very odd indeed with IBM's big voice of open source
>praise, yada yada, and what Lou has said in the past, that there
>would be any question at all of wether it would be open source or
>not. Isn't big blue behind open source? Or is it just for
>publicity? Makes me wonder now...
Yes
>> One of these centuries we must replace the present keyboard
>> and console stuff, probably by something very similar to
>> Vojtech's input device stuff, and we must make sure that
>> the new code is powerful enough to last for a few years again.
> Why only something similar to the input suite
On 15 Jun 2001 16:03:32 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> IBM Retail Store Solutions dept has certain PS/2 keyboards which extend the
> standard PS/2 specification in order to support addition hardware built into the
> keyboard (such as a Magnetic Strip Reader, Keylock, Tone generator, extra ke
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> One of these centuries we must replace the present keyboard
> and console stuff, probably by something very similar to
> Vojtech's input device stuff, and we must make sure that
> the new code is powerful enough to last for a few years again.
Why only s
>> patch to allow other drivers to register with the PS/2 driver as 'filters'
> Didn't we just conclude a discussion here on linux-kernel, which said
> that patches which simply add hooks allowing proprietary extensions are
> not accepted into the kernel?
There is a certain need for this kind of
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Dan Streetman wrote:
>Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:03:38 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Dan Streetman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: Linux Kernel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>S
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:14:05PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> >> Vojtech, could you comment on if the above is possible using the input
> >layer?
> >
> >Yes, and quite easily it'll fit into the input layer. Basically the way
> >to do it would be to open the PS/2 port in the filter driver (th
>> Vojtech, could you comment on if the above is possible using the input
>layer?
>
>Yes, and quite easily it'll fit into the input layer. Basically the way
>to do it would be to open the PS/2 port in the filter driver (thus
>disabling the normal keyboard driver to open it) and then register a ne
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 05:30:03PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>
> >X11 likes to talk direct to the PS/2 port. I actually think you should
> >instead
> >talk to Vojtech for the mainstream kernel about the input device work. It
> >sounds much cleaner and more close to what you need
>
> Ah, I did
>X11 likes to talk direct to the PS/2 port. I actually think you should
>instead
>talk to Vojtech for the mainstream kernel about the input device work. It
>sounds much cleaner and more close to what you need
Ah, I didn't realize the input layer was handling PS/2 stuff...? Although I am
not su
>Didn't we just conclude a discussion here on linux-kernel, which said
>that patches which simply add hooks allowing proprietary extensions are
>not accepted into the kernel?
Yes (I assume you mean the whole 'sockreg' register/unregister thread(s)...;-)
I never intended to get that patch in. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In order to use these keyboards, a the standard PS/2 driver needs to behave a
> bit differently; thus attached is a modifcation to the PS/2 driver which allows
> other drivers to register with the PS/2 driver as 'filters'. There is a
> arbitrary max number of 'filters'
13 matches
Mail list logo
