Re: gpm and X problem investigated
I support your conclusion and and asks the same question.
Why did it change?
Regards,
/Karl
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Hammar Aspö Data karl@kalle.csb.ki.se
Lilla Aspö 2340 +46 173 140 57 Networks
S-742 94 Östhammar +46 70 511 97 84 Computers
Sweden Consulting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "J.A. Bezemer" <costar@panic.et.tudelft.nl>
Subject: gpm and X problem investigated
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 00:22:23 +0200 (CEST)
>
> Hi!
>
> In the recent past, there have been multiple (bug) reports about the behaviour
> of potato (& woody?) gpm in the presence of X (or vice versa, really). I've
> done some research, with these results:
>
> 1. On slink and probably before (because I don't remember things being
> differently), gpm did not default to be in repeater mode or even
> ask about that. In the X config, you would mention your real /dev/mouse
> and your real protocol.
>
> 2. On any->potato upgrades, the config file is not touched, and gpm and X
> continue to behave as before. In an upgraded potato system, X still
> needs your real /dev/mouse and your real protocol.
>
> 3. On new potato installs, gpm defaults to be in repeater mode, and to
> repeat in the ms3 protocol.
>
> 4. When gpm is in repeater mode, it does not release the mouse device
> when switching to X, but expects X to read data from /dev/gpmdata.
> So, in the current potato default install, IF you install gpm,
> X config must use /dev/gpmdata and ms protocol always, regardless
> of mouse type.
>
> 5. In the current potato install, IF you do NOT install gpm, X config
> needs your real /dev/mouse with your real protocol.
>
> 6. My personal experience shows that, with gpm repeating in the ms3
> protocol, the middle mouse button is very hard to get working in X, if
> at all. Also, movement data of the mouse appears to get lost, resulting
> in erratic and uncomfortable mouse behaviour.
>
> 7. The solution to the repeating problem in 6. is to default to
> repeating in the "raw" = "untranslated" protocol. Then, X config
> would need /dev/gpmdata always, but your real protocol.
>
> So, on a potato system, the X configuration may require three different
> settings, dependent on your personal history:
>
> real /dev/mouse + real protocol when upgraded from slink or before
> OR on new potato install without gpm
>
> /dev/gpmdata + ms protocol on "unmodified" new potato install w/gpm
>
> /dev/gpmdata + real protocol on "modified" new potato install w/gpm
>
> This situation seems highly undesirable to me, if only because this is not
> documented properly anywhere -- and even documenting the current situation in
> a way that is clear to the average user (i.e. M$Win convert) is a daunting
> task.
>
> Apart from changing nothing and leaving our users completely in the dark,
> there seem to be two options:
>
> a. Let gpm default to repeating in raw mode (to solve 6.), and add a very
> clear notice that X should be (re)configured with /dev/gpmdata but using
> the real protocol -- but when gpm is either stopped or removed/purged, that
> the X config should be changed again (!! I don't know any package that
> requires _another_ package to be _manually_ reconfigured on install/
> remove).
>
> b. Let gpm default to not repeating at all, without needing any further
> documentation (AFAIK; I don't remember questions on gpm <-> X behaviour
> in slink).
>
> Obviously, b. is the right choice (IMHO ;-). Furthermore, a fix to this effect
> seems more than necessary to go into 2.2r1.
>
> Or... is there a flaw in my logic? Or is there some very important reason for
> gpm's current behaviour?
>
>
> Regards,
> Anne Bezemer
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: