Policy concerning keycodes > 255

[Sébastien Mazy]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:07:40AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:54:21PM +0100, Sébastien Mazy wrote:
> 
> > My question is as follows: What is the HAL commit policy concerning
> > these unsupported keycodes? or, said differently: would fdi patches (not
> > generic, per specific hardware) to remap these unsupported keycodes be
> > accepted or will the situation stay as it is until Xorg is fixed? (and
> > so, broken for many users)
> 
> The problem with that approach is that there isn't necessarily anything 
> in the lower range that's appropriate for the keys in question.

Yes, that sure is a dirty hack.

> > For instance, my thinkpad keyboard sends KEY_VENDOR and my remote
> > control KEY_CHANNELUP. This could be remapped respectively to
> > KEY_COMPUTER and KEY_UP.
> 
> Yes, but they'd be wrong. Non-X based consumers of the events (which may 
> even include hal) would then be getting a different keycode. It'd be 
> nice if the effort went into helping with the X work instead.


On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 09:20:06AM +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 22:54 +0100, Sébastien Mazy wrote:
> > these keycodes are not supported by Xorg at the moment
> > and that might be the reason why HAL doesn't even forward them to
> > evdev.
> > However, this support should be implemented with X Input 2.0, see:
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2009-January/042441.html
> 
> I think we just need to help Peter with the X changes -- there's no
> point trying to hack around this.

Granted. Moreover such a hack would have needed to be removed at some
point (XI2), requiring someone to remember it.


Thanks for your answers!


(why doesn't this list set the Reply-To:?)

-- 
Sébastien Mazy