Re: gpm and X problem investigated
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:22:23AM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
>
> [snipped some good stuff]
>
> 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?
I don't know if there's a flaw, but there's a sparc issue. Hopefully
some sparc people are on the list that'll correct me if I'm wrong, or
you can check with them, but AFAIK, gpm does not work *at all* with the
Xsun servers. On those systems, gpm needs to be purged and /dev/gpmdata
needs to be removed.
> Regards,
> Anne Bezemer
Thanks for all your good work Anne!
Steve
--
Steve Bowman <sbowman@frostwork.net> (preferred)
Buckeye, AZ <sbowman@goodnet.com> <bowmanc@acm.org>
<http://www.goodnet.com/~sbowman/>
Powered by Debian GNU/Linux <http://www.debian.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: