[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bluetooth mice?



On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:34:19PM +0100, Digby Tarvin wrote:
> I'm not really sure how it looks to the system, but lsmod shows:
> 	hci_usb                13812  0 
> 	bluetooth              41732  1 hci_usb
> which I assume means it is handled like (or maybe is) a USB device.

On my system, lsmod | grep bluetooth:
	bluetooth              44228  6 rfcomm,hidp,l2cap,hci_usb

> dmesg shows:
>   mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
>   Bluetooth: Core ver 2.8
>   NET: Registered protocol family 31
>   Bluetooth: HCI device and connection manager initialized
>   Bluetooth: HCI socket layer initialized
>   Bluetooth: HCI USB driver ver 2.9
>   usbcore: registered new driver hci_usb

My dmesg shows:
	usbcore: registered new driver usbfs
	usbcore: registered new driver hub
	Bluetooth: Core ver 2.7
	NET: Registered protocol family 31
	Bluetooth: HCI device and connection manager initialized
	Bluetooth: HCI socket layer initialized
	Bluetooth: HCI USB driver ver 2.8
	usbcore: registered new driver hci_usb
			...
	usbcore: registered new driver usbhid
			...
	Bluetooth: L2CAP ver 2.7
	Bluetooth: L2CAP socket layer initialized
	Bluetooth: HIDP (Human Interface Emulation) ver 1.1
	Bluetooth: RFCOMM ver 1.5
	Bluetooth: RFCOMM socket layer initialized
	Bluetooth: RFCOMM TTY layer initialized

That probably matches pretty much what you're getting now.  I think
the hidp is all I'm using as far as the mouse goes.
 
> > [1] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16826125026
> 
> Looks like it would do the trick, though I would rather like to
> find a traditional three button mouse like my old PS/2 Logitec.
> I suppose I am going to have to settle for the 'wheel as middle
> button' compromise...

Yeah, you might have to compromise.  When I was looking I didn't see
any traditional three-button bluetooth mice.  Aside from that, though,
this Kensington mouse has been just right.  Big and comfortable.

Best of luck,
gsf



Reply to: