[RFC] Automatic modifier update of slave devices

[Keith Packard]

Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> writes:

> I'm suggesting the minimal change possible to solve the stated problem
> (which is essentially that new slaves don't inherit the LED - i.e.
> lock - state of their masters).

Ok, that seems like a fine plan to me

> I'm pretty wary of the full push to always push master state down to
> slaves, especially given the fact that slaves may have wholly disjoint
> keymaps to their masters.

So, the trick is to identify which modifiers are locking.
CapsLock/ShiftLock is easy as it uses a fixed modifier bit, but
NumLock can move around.

-- 
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 810 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20140224/d1da0719/attachment.pgp>