[Spice-devel] [patch 0/2] vdagent KEYVAL extension

[Dietmar Maurer]

> > Oh, I get you wrong.  So you really think we can modify existing message
> formats based on caps?
> > That looks a bit confusing to me, and it is not clear how that should
> > work because message marshallers are auto-generated?
> 
> I don't remember. In the case of clipboard selection, it was certainly easier since
> we don't use the marshaller atm. 
> Perhaps have a second marshaller function version for this case would work?

how does that work (can't see it)?

Simply adding a new message solve the problem easily.
 
> >> that's irrelevant for the protocol change. You can also convert most
> >> XT scancode to utf...
> >
> > no, you can't do that (because you do not know the keymap)!
> > You can do it for US keymap - but most of us do not use that keymap.
> 
> right, but it is assumed the server/vm have the keymap (or default).
> It can convert to utf. That's what happen if i open gedit and type a key. utf
> conversion is irrelevant to your change. It's just a keysym you want to send.
> What you do with it, the protocol doesn't care.

Not everything is a VM (there is no server side keymap in spiceterm).

> The day the protocol send input strings, then it can be said it will be utf8
> encoded.
> 
> 
> > I need utf8 and special/function keys. Using keysyms you get both.
> 
> I got that.
> 
> >> extension will not be relevant for typical client/vm usage (or even
> >> x11 & weston
> >> server) that Spice is targetting, and I think you could use that
> >> arbitrary utf8 string input approach instead. But I don't want to
> >> force you to do it. We can also accept extensions to the protocol that are not
> relevant for VM.
> >
> > Great!
> >
> >> > > > It is still not clear to me what patch do you prefer - vdagent
> >> > > > protocol extension or the input channel extension?
> >> > >
> >> > > In your case, a gdk_keyval message, the input channel.
> >> >
> >> > or better 'x11_keysym' message?
> >>
> >> You are using it with gdk constant in client and spiceterm, but gdk
> >> keysyms seems to be exact mapping of x11. So either we decide to
> >> follow x11 or gdk. I would tend to say Gdk, which is more
> >> cross-platform (even though it's in fact just x11 atm).
> >
> > But the gdk docs simply references to the x11 docs, so I guess x11 is the
> source.
> > The also mention that they keep that in sync with x11.
> 
> yeah, and scratch what I said, X11 makes more sense has it is a protocol,
> regardless of the platform.
> 
> So you have enough to update your patches?

I still have no idea how to generate 2 marshallers for one protocol message?