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

Bug#165134: acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#165134: xlibs: [xkb] symbol change in us keyboard disables Meta and Compose key)



severity 165134 wishlist
retitle 165134 xlibs: [xkb] please break compatibility with upstream in pc104 symbols file
tag 165134 + wontfix
thanks

> So in Debian 3.0 Windows keys work as Meta keys. Debian 3.x Windows do
> not. Yup, no breakage there.

People also complained that it was "broken" when the Alt and Meta keys
weren't handled the same way on pc101/102 versus pc104/105 keyboards.

Both groups can't be right.

> What is worse I was using debconf to perform configuration file
> handling, this kind of change could have been handled transparently by
> having pc104 switch to altwin on upgrade.

Well, no.

"pc104" is an XkbModel, defined by a subsection of the "us" symbols
file.  "altwin" in a partial symbols file that will only work as desired
as an XkbOptions setting.

The Debconf templates have no prior knowledge as to whether the Alt
modifiers should be on the same keys as the Meta keysyms[1].

I therefore cannot take your advice without making *someone* unhappy.

For the sake of compatiblity with upstream, and people who might choose
to migrate their XF86Config files among Linux distributions, I choose to
make those who feel as you do unhappy.

> As I mentioned you should probably forward this as something for the
> Debian 3.x release notes. It is the difference between a Changelog file
> and a NEWS file.

That is not the nature of your report.  Your report tells me I've
"broken" it.  If you want some documentation, file a wishlist or minor
bug, preferably with a patch.  Note that I am not the Release Notes
Maintainer, so a bug about release notes should not be filed against my
package.

> > Closing this spurious report.
> 
> Reopened.

I guess I'll make both Ian Jackson and Manoj unhappy (have you been
reading -project) by both leaving the bug open and tagging it "wontfix".

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=77039&repeatmerged=yes
(Which, incidentally, I should be closing.  Thanks for the reminder.)

[2] If you don't understand all of the above jargon, then you probably
don't have sufficient knowledge to responsibly discuss the issue, should
defer to those who do, and should close your report.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |       kernel panic -- causal failure
branden@debian.org                 |       universe will now reboot
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpvBy7CZVPr7.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: