[RFC] Automatic modifier update of slave devices

[Keith Packard]

Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net> writes:


> I'm fine with either 3 or 4 tbh, though note that from the user's POV we
> already do 4. open xterm, hit ctrl one one keyboard and C on the other and
> you'll get a ctrl+c through the core protocol and from the XI2 master.

Right, I wanted to enumerate all of the choices and differences between
them, even though I think we all agree that differences visible through
slave devices are largely irrelevant.

In any case, I think the only concern here is that the state of the
master lock indicators get reflected to all slave devices, and whether
you do that by mirroring the indicators, lock modifiers or all of the
modifiers is largely irrelevant.

I think Daniel's concern was that by trying to reflect all of the
modifiers, even those which may mis-match between different slaves, you
may accidentally cause further damage. Would it be difficult to map the
non-standard modifier bits by keysym and try to reflect those
accurately?

-- 
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/20140224/4979e73e/attachment.pgp>