xorg.conf.d - InputClass feature request
peter.hutterer at who-t.net
Tue Jan 5 16:15:37 PST 2010
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 03:47:42PM +0100, Simon Thum wrote:
> Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 04:01:27PM +0100, Alberto Milone wrote:
> >> The quirk would be applied only if the tag matched the one assigned by udev.
> >> Is this correct?
> > yes, this was the idea, though we might need to think about namespacing the
> > tags. some discussion with the udev guys would be beneficial here.
> How far would you say we can go with tags?
> A thing I've had stubling in my head was to automatically downscale
> high-DPI mice, based on config rules of course. In tags, I'd have to go
> if DPI > 1000 tag="high-dpi"
> if DPI > 2000 tag="super-high-dpi"
> if DPI > 3000 tag="super-duper-high-dpi"
> which isn't exactly it. But what's appropriate then?
IMO, the point of autoconfigurations is to make devices _work_. So yes, you
could do the above but at the same time - scaling is something hopefully
eventually be set in the session. If the device works well enough so you can
click your name on the login manager, that's good enough for a start.
Tags are only useful for what they are and there will be devices where we
have to have a product/name matching in addition to whatever tag has been
applied. There's also the special cases where the tag may just be a product
The benefit of the tag system is that it's technically easy to implement and
it gives us more flexibility than stricter matches like DMI. The rest is up
to the usage of the tags and some may not be as pretty as others. As long as
hardware vendors keep producing hardware, software vendors will need to keep
producing hacks. But we might as well make it easier to do so.
More information about the xorg-devel