On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 09:22:07PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > I know. It is a Microsoft standard. See
> > http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/kbd/scancodes-1.html#ss1.8
> >
> > The patch is harmless, and vaguely useful, and superfluous:
> > if the purpose of the kernel patch is to attach uses via loadkeys,
> > then without the patch one needs setkeycodes followed by loadkeys.
>
> That patch allows to use new keys for new in-kernel use (such as going
> suspend using apm when one of those is present). We also might want to
> assign standart sequences for these keys in
> drivers/char/defkeymap.map.
That is precisely the reason that I don't like the patch.
There are many keyboards (Microsoft Internet, Logitech Internet
etc etc) that have lots of keys, but not these three.
Since there are very few spare keycodes and several keyboards
that need up to twenty new keycodes, it is unavoidable that
there is re-use of keycodes.
Thus, if you think of some application, and part of the configuration
procedure of that application is fixing a few keycodes, that is fine.
But if you build these in into the kernel, then these are no longer
free for other uses.
And before talking about these - the three Microsoft Windows keys
are much more common, and by some coincidence I gave them a fixed
keycode long ago. Are there common generic uses? What standard
sequences would you like to assign to them, and why?
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 21:00:18 EST