[RFC] Automatic modifier update of slave devices

[Keith Packard]

Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> writes:

> whilst not doing anything surprising like having a base modifier down
> which was never pressed on that device.

Are you saying that we should only mirror the locking modifier state
From master to slaves? That seems plausible, but seems more complicated
and not all that useful to me, as now the slave will report some, but
not all, of the master modifier state.

-- 
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20140224/12c1b53b/attachment.pgp>