From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 10 09:11:35 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C591E106564A for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:11:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (agora.rdrop.com [199.26.172.34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E01F8FC16 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:11:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id pAA9BJKr045751 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:11:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id pAA9BICP045750; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:11:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from fbsd81 ([192.168.200.81]) by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA12584; Thu, 10 Nov 11 01:09:08 PST Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:09:01 -0800 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: cswiger@mac.com Message-Id: <4ebbf71d.fOrnoytXfIP6Nf0X%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <4EB88225.9020702@bredband.net> <20111108205600.7a8e0205.freebsd@edvax.de> <20111108215114.24d336e6.freebsd@edvax.de> <4EBA5EBD.7020501@bredband.net> <86pqh1njww.fsf@kropotkin.hack.org> <30329CB5-03FA-4717-81E6-43CC9CE43713@mac.com> <20111110020123.778d356f.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd@edvax.de, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: X server and xinit works excellent....almost. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:11:35 -0000 Chuck Swiger wrote: > > My assumption still is: Not _every_ keyboard manufacturer does > > code the layout into the USB identification. If you tell me I'm > > wrong with this assumption, I'll be happy. :-) > > Folks are supposed to use a different product ID for different > devices, so you can uniquely identify them. > > I can't promise that every vendor handles this perfectly, any > more than folks always ensured that PCI ids uniquely identified > a specific hardware version, but one should blame the vendor for > being brain-damaged in such cases; it isn't a fault of the USB > standard.... If someone manufactures a single type of keyboard -- using only one type of ASIC, one PCB/keyswitch layout, one kind of housing, etc. -- I'd say it is very much open to interpretation whether snapping on a different collection of keycaps makes it into a different "product". Even if the manufacturer tried to cover for the possibility, e.g. by providing a jumper on the PCB which is supposed to be set according to the installed set of keycaps, there will still be cases where an end user replaces or rearranges the keycaps to change the layout and doesn't change the jumper setting.