<html> <head> <base href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Key repeat cancel under Wayland should depend on which key is repeating" href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=781285#c3">Comment # 3</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Key repeat cancel under Wayland should depend on which key is repeating" href="https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=781285">bug 781285</a> from <a href="page.cgi?id=describeuser.html&login=ofourdan%40redhat.com" title="Olivier Fourdan <ofourdan@redhat.com>"> Olivier Fourdan</a> <pre>Created <a href="attachment.cgi?id=351038&action=diff" name="attach_351038" title="[PATCH v2] wayland: selectively cancel key repeat on key release">attachment 351038</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=351038&action=edit" title="[PATCH v2] wayland: selectively cancel key repeat on key release">[details]</a> <a href='review?bug=781285&attachment=351038'>[review]</a> [PATCH v2] wayland: selectively cancel key repeat on key release (In reply to Dan Torop from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=781285#c2">comment #2</a>) > Glad to hear back! Sorry, it's just that I didn't see your bug report initially. > Mixed results: <a href="attachment.cgi?id=350636&action=diff" name="attach_350636" title="[PATCH] Wayland: Cancel repeat only on last key press">attachment 350636</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=350636&action=edit" title="[PATCH] Wayland: Cancel repeat only on last key press">[details]</a> <a href='review?bug=781285&attachment=350636'>[review]</a> [review] does solve <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Wayland: Make key repeat more resilient to keys not being released" href="show_bug.cgi?id=781896">bug 781896</a>, > but it doesn't produce expected behavior in the second case of this bug. To > rewrite that case as in your (clearer) steps in <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Wayland: Make key repeat more resilient to keys not being released" href="show_bug.cgi?id=781896">bug 781896</a>: > > Steps to reproduce: > > 1. Press key "a" and keep the key pressed. > 2. Press key "b" and release. > 3. Press key "b" and keep the key pressed. > 4. Release key "a". > [...] Yeah, I see what you mean. I don't have strong opinions there, whatever works and is close enough to Xorg behavior will be fine with me, and Xorg behaves as described here. > As an aside, in your patch, you init repeat_key to 0. In my patch, I didn't > initialize repeat_key, but do test it, assuming that, as it was only tested > after a key release, it would by then have already been set by a keypress. > Your approach is certainly safer! Well it's easy enough to add. > This bug report came from a problem with darktable to under Wayland > (<a href="https://redmine.darktable.org/issues/11535#note-14">https://redmine.darktable.org/issues/11535#note-14</a>), and both your > <a href="attachment.cgi?id=350636&action=diff" name="attach_350636" title="[PATCH] Wayland: Cancel repeat only on last key press">attachment 350636</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=350636&action=edit" title="[PATCH] Wayland: Cancel repeat only on last key press">[details]</a> <a href='review?bug=781285&attachment=350636'>[review]</a> [review] and my <a href="attachment.cgi?id=349836&action=diff" name="attach_349836" title="[PATCH] wayland: selectively cancel key repeat on key release">attachment 349836</a> <a href="attachment.cgi?id=349836&action=edit" title="[PATCH] wayland: selectively cancel key repeat on key release">[details]</a> <a href='review?bug=781285&attachment=349836'>[review]</a> > [review] solve that problem. I don't have the big picture of Wayland devices > which you have, and would hate to blithely advocate removal of nkeys, but do > want to put it out there for consideration! Again I don't have strong opinions, we could go with your patch, it makes sense. I am attaching an updated version of your patch with some changes (it needed updating after commit <a href="https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk%2B/commit/?id=83322a4">83322a4</a> had landed), including the repeat_key value (I am not sure this is actually needed, just the over cautious part of me asking for that) - I also change the type of repeat_active to be a boolean, not hat it makes much difference eventually, but in essence it is a boolean so klet's use the appropriate type. Lastly, I added a link to this bugzilla in your commit message, but if it was me, I would shorten and simplify the commit message though.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>