Radical idea for X-modmap problem.

[walter harms]

walt schrieb:
> On 07/26/2009 01:56 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
>> David Moffatt wrote:
>>> Responding to the thread about mapping hardware scan codes -->  X key
>>> codes and keyboards with>  248 keys.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the solution is to take the hardware scan code -->  Symbol
>>> problem out of the X layer entirely.  Let the OS deal with that in its
>>> own manner.
>>>
>> X already does this: keycodes in X have no need to be even remotely
>> similar to what the operating system does, or what the hardware generates.
>>
>> Keycodes on various other platforms may have values that bear no
>> resemblance to the codes used in Linux, or in IBM derivative keyboards...
> 
> Being strictly an amateur programmer, I've always wondered how many
> people/institutions actually use X for remote display the way it was
> designed to be used.  Seems to introduce a great deal of confusing
> complexity for features many of us never use.
> 

it is common to have a fat server and several clients that use it remote
(not only thin clients)

re,
 wh