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

Re: xlibs keybinding on Sparc U5



On Saturday 08 January 2005 23:55, Nikolai Rinas wrote:
> It doesn't work, but as I saw your diff, i had an idea to remove
> the "include "srvr_ctrl(xfree86)";" - lines. After this dirty Patch
> came my binding back.

Ah nice. That means they've really messed something up.

I'm guessing this may have to do with the fact that with 2.6 kernels Sun 
keyboards are presented as having a 'normal' at-keyboard layout.
They've probably tried to fix this by changing the keymap, forgetting that 
for 2.4 kernels the old 'real' sun layout needs to be supported.

> The question is, what the "include"-line for. I don't know how
> X manage the keybinding.

I don't know either, let's let the package maintainers worry about that.

> So I think this two Mails are interesting for the Developer of
> this Package. I'm new in Debian-Lists so how do i shall proceed?

Best think is first check the changelog for the package xlibs to see if 
you can find an indication of why the change was made.
You can use the "C" key for that in xlibs or else look on 
packages.debian.org (don't forget to select 'sarge' on the form).
You'll have to check the changelog for both the -9 and -10 versions!

The lists are _not_ useful here. The Bug Tracking System is. See 
bugs.debian.org for more info. Read some existing reports in the BTS for 
the xlibs package to get a feel for them.

The next step is to file a bug using 'reportbug xlibs' (if the problem has 
not been reported already, but I wouldn't think so).
I'd suggest severity 'important'. Give the bug a usefull title like 'Sun5 
keyboard no longer works after xlibs update' and explain the problems and 
the way you fixed them as best you can.
(You could maybe add my theory, but could also leave it to the maintainer 
to figure out the cause of the problem. I'm not really sure if the theory 
is correct; the changelog may tell you more.)

Cheers,
FJP

Attachment: pgp48zVnutUX9.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: