From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 7 21:17:16 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A28BE16A4CE for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 21:17:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from niobe.ijs.si (mail.ijs.si [193.2.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A9D43D41 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 21:17:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dejan.lesjak@ijs.si) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by niobe.ijs.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id E28771DD585; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:17:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from niobe.ijs.si ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (niobe.ijs.si [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09295-01-10; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:17:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from metatron.ijs.si (metatron.ijs.si [193.2.4.152]) by niobe.ijs.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9061B1DD57E; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:17:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from idefix.ijs.si (idefix.ijs.si [193.2.4.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by metatron.ijs.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C1D1C00B03; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:17:06 +0100 (CET) From: Dejan Lesjak To: Matthias Muthmann Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:17:05 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <200502240244.03104.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> <200503022010.39072.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> <1109950493.21431.5.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1109950493.21431.5.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200503072217.05939.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ijs.si cc: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with X.. X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 21:17:16 -0000 On Friday 04 of March 2005 16:34, Matthias Muthmann wrote: > On Mi, 2005-03-02 at 20:10 +0100, Dejan Lesjak wrote: > > Just the ones that don't work (if they are consecutive in the row, only a > > range would be fine). I'm also interested in whether without these > > patches applied - was the row in question behaving the same as the other > > keys (ie codes generated being off by one) or was it behaving differently > > even then? > > > > > > Dejan > > Ok, now I tried X without your patches. The lowest row behaves in the > same way as with your patches: > e.g. keycode 198 (keysym 0x0, NoSymbol) > But the keycodes are shifted by one (Y is 191, not 190 ...) I see, this should eliminate concern that previous patches remapped last line to weird codes... Digging a bit through this I hope that we're at least a bit closer to something. I think we could use the mapping for wsconsole for sun keyboards: Looking at keycodes we should get (this is a type5 keyboard, right?) in /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xkb/keycodes/sun - for de layout of type5 keyboard key Y is so the code should be 107. Now before mapping in driver (for which these patches are) is converted to this code, MIN_KEYCODE (defined as 8 in this case) is added to scancode, so that one should be 99. As we already subtract 1 before addition of MIN_KEYCODE, scancode should be 100 or 0x64, which is what we have in wsSun map in bsd_KbdMap.c. Anyway... if my rambling above is correct, this is what you could try: of previous patches keep only patch-kbd_sparc_2.c (remove patch-bsd_kbd.c and patch-bsd_KbdMap.c) and add the patch here: http://www.ijs.si/~lesi/xorg/patch-bsd_KbdMap.c.2 Better? Worse? Horrible? Dejan