Re: X on Mac
Brian Morris wrote:
> On 5/22/07, Joel Ewy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> >> So I'm curious to know whether the same problem shows up in
>> X.org. You
>> >> mention that the cursor keys don't work -- are you sure the keys
>> >> work at all, or do they just not repeat like you would expect? In
>> > no nothing at all happens. however, there are error messages
>> > from the new xorg stuff I need to check out.
>> How about key repeat? If you hold down a (non-cursor) key, does it
>> repeat as expected, or do you just get a single keystroke no matter how
>> long you hold the key? I'm really curious as to whether this is an X
>> issue or a kernel ADB driver issue, or what.
> yes key repeats of regular keys.
So, to summarize what I think I know about the problem:
Potato: XFree86 3.? [Don't remember key repeat problem]
Woody: XFree86 4.? No key repeat
Sarge: XFree 86 4.? No key repeat
Etch-m68k: X.org Key repeat works
This may just be a problem with XFree 4. Anyone know if I can install
XF86 3.x or x.org on Sarge? It would be interesting to see if that
solves the problem. Failing that, would a dist-upgrade be the best way
to experiment with etch-m68k and x.org, or will I have to do a fresh
> no success with xmodmap experiments with the cursor/page keys though.
> still dead keys. tried pc104 layout instead of mac and that got rid
> of xkbcomp errors but dead keys still dead.
> AFAIK nothing wrong with my keyboard. however i have a non mac
> adb keyboard i could try (adesso), i would rather not I need it
Hmm. As I recall, there is another layout (or was in XFree86 4.x) for
the Mac called something like "macintosh_old". I believe this was for
the older, small ADB keyboards that didn't have Function keys. It
sounds like you're using a full-sized keyboard, but it might tell us
something if you try out the other layout.
> although i have more Xclients going now from debian menu, xemacs
> is still crashing, producing some verbose error messages. I really do
> need it, otherwise i can't really use X.
> I see that it was build in march however the gcc of november and august
> kernel. that is not too encouraging.
I hope you get it working. I just use a vi clone in a terminal or or
whatever GUI editor is available in X. But I know from experience that
those text editor keystrokes get burned into the synapses, and if you're
stuck with something you're not used to, it can be a painful experience.
> I tried your other window managers suggestions and although they
> do work, (fluxbox and flwm) I feel openbox is better in general and
> here as well.
Maybe I'll check out openbox sometime.