On 08/24/16 09:38, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On 08/23/16 21:50, Bruce Evans wrote:
+kbd->kb_delay1 = imax(((int *)arg)[0], 250);
+kbd->kb_delay2 = imax(((int *)arg)[1], 34);
It looks like this will pass negative kb_delay's. How do you
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On 08/23/16 21:50, Bruce Evans wrote:
+ kbd->kb_delay1 = imax(((int *)arg)[0], 250);
+ kbd->kb_delay2 = imax(((int *)arg)[1], 34);
It looks like this will pass negative kb_delay's. How do you handle that?
imax(negti
On 08/23/16 21:50, Bruce Evans wrote:
+ kbd->kb_delay1 = imax(((int *)arg)[0], 250);
+ kbd->kb_delay2 = imax(((int *)arg)[1], 34);
Hi,
It looks like this will pass negative kb_delay's. How do you handle that?
--HPS
___
sv
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016, Oliver Pinter wrote:
On 8/23/16, Bruce Evans wrote:
...
Log:
Fix key delay and repeat, part 1.
...
Convert 0.0 to the documented 250.34.
...
Do you plan to MFC these changes to 10-STABLE? It would be really nice
to see all of these improvements.
Maybe when I "finish
On 8/23/16, Bruce Evans wrote:
> Author: bde
> Date: Tue Aug 23 19:50:16 2016
> New Revision: 304699
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/304699
>
> Log:
> Fix key delay and repeat, part 1.
>
> kbdcontrol -r fast is documented to give a non-emulated atkbd's fastest
> rate of 250.
Author: bde
Date: Tue Aug 23 19:50:16 2016
New Revision: 304699
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/304699
Log:
Fix key delay and repeat, part 1.
kbdcontrol -r fast is documented to give a non-emulated atkbd's fastest
rate of 250.34, but is misimplemented to request this as 0.0
