Constraining cursor to RandR crtcs

Xavier Bestel xavier.bestel at
Mon Apr 2 04:36:56 PDT 2007

On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 13:19 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > I'd be lying if I said I saw the point.  If moving the mouse off-screen
> > is a use case we want to support, why do we currently clamp it to the
> > screen limits on single screens; why do we clamp it to the extents of
> > multi-screen setups?  I just don't see why it's necessary to be able to
> > move the mouse into a specific dead area within the extents but outside
> > all visible screens.
> IMHO if you don't allow excursions within dead zones you'll always find a
> screen setup where your solution suck. If you do allow excursions there
> (possibly with acceleration so leaving dead zone is quick) things are much
> easier. You just have to provide visual hints to the user where the cursor
> is and how far in what direction must he move it to find a live zone

Loosing the pointer in a dead area isn't really good. If the area is big
enough that a simple wiggling won't show the pointer, you're really

Anyway, maybe the WM will decide that the setup is something totally
different (e.g. one screen is an exposé-like view of all windows and the
others are 3D cubes or something, or one is a fullscreen powerpoint
presentation or media player and the other a regular desktop) and have
some really different rules for border crossing.

Or maybe one user wants dead areas, the other wants warping.

So letting WM and other clients decide may be the best option. Maybe
this can be part of the input coordinates transformation work in Sun's


More information about the xorg mailing list