On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 09:16:01AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > The calcomp driver didn't stay supported for long after modularisation, and > it certainly no longer builds, but it's still in the archive: > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-input-calcomp/-/tree/master > > I expect the build failures are mostly API drift, so if you have hardware > that the driver would support, it ought to work as well as it ever did. > Which, these days, might imply things like "you need to set it up with > xorg.conf because neither the kernel nor libinput know it's there".
Best choice here is probably looking at the wacom w8001 kernel driver drivers/input/touchscreen/wacom_w8001.c which is an old wacom driver for serial tablets. That driver is loaded via systemd + udev, thus presents an evdev node and the rest of userspace is blissfully unaware of the fact that serial devices ever existed. grep for inputattach in the xf86-input-wacom repo and you'll find the various pieces. theory goes you should be able to look at the xf86-input-calcomp sources, write something like the w8001 driver, then create a similar kernel driver and thus be ready for the next millennium without having to actually resurrect, update, maintain and configure an X input driver that's been unmaintained for 15 years. Cheers, Peter > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 6:01 AM Russ Bixby <bixb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey all - > > > > So "calcomp" is a reserved word under the legacy XFree86 stuff in the > > x.org source tree, but the driver seems not to actually exist under any > > version of x.org which I can find. > > > > Anyone have any pointers regarding where I might best find a starting > > point if I wish to use a real (E size) digitizer for actually digitizing > > stuff, rather than using a Wacom tablet like a mouse with a hard pad? I'm > > happy to code, but there's no point reinventing the axle; the most recent > > version of a driver suitable for my uses would be a great place to start, > > so I can update and then fold it into the current version of X. > > > > Thanks! > >
