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

Bug#444828: marked as done (xkb-data: CapsLock-Alt_L combination doesn't work when ctrl(swapcaps) is set)

Your message dated Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:54:07 +0100
with message-id <47415D3F.1000306@ens-lyon.org>
and subject line xserver-xorg-input-kbd: order matters when pressing Ctrl + Alt
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: xkb-data
Version: 1.0~cvs.20070916-1
Severity: important


If the xkb option ctrl(swapcaps) is set to make CapsLock an additional
Ctrl, CapsLock-Alt_L combination does not generate KeyPress event for
Alt_L when pressing Alt_L key.  Instead it is generated when *releasing*
the Alt_L key.  There is no problem when pressing CapsLock-Alt_R or
Ctrl_L-Alt_L.

Here is my xkb settings:

  athlon:~% setxkbmap -v
  Trying to build keymap using the following components:
  keycodes:   xfree86+aliases(qwerty)
  types:      complete
  compat:     complete
  symbols:    pc+us+ctrl(swapcaps)
  geometry:   pc(pc104)

To reproduce the problem, first do 'setxkbmap -v -option ctrl(swapcaps)'.
Then press CapsLock, and press Alt_L.  No event is generated when
pressing Alt_L.  If you release Alt_L, then both KeyPress and KeyRelease
events for Alt_L are generated at the *same* time.  See the following
xev output:

KeyPress event, serial 27, synthetic NO, window 0x3c00001,
    root 0x1a6, subw 0x0, time 198571408, (367,-23), root:(371,0),
    state 0x10, keycode 66 (keysym 0xffe3, Control_L), same_screen YES,
    XKeysymToKeycode returns keycode: 37
    XLookupString gives 0 bytes: 
    XmbLookupString gives 0 bytes: 
    XFilterEvent returns: False

KeyPress event, serial 30, synthetic NO, window 0x3c00001,
    root 0x1a6, subw 0x0, time 198578840, (379,-23), root:(383,0),
    state 0x14, keycode 64 (keysym 0xffe9, Alt_L), same_screen YES,
    XLookupString gives 0 bytes: 
    XmbLookupString gives 0 bytes: 
    XFilterEvent returns: False

KeyRelease event, serial 30, synthetic NO, window 0x3c00001,
    root 0x1a6, subw 0x0, time 198578840, (379,-23), root:(383,0),
    state 0x1c, keycode 64 (keysym 0xffe9, Alt_L), same_screen YES,
    XLookupString gives 0 bytes: 
    XFilterEvent returns: False

Note that the timestamps for KeyPress and KeyRelease events are the
same.

Takeshi

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (990, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.22.9 (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 2:1.4.1~git20071117-1


Andrea Vettorello wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2007 6:29 PM, Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
>> Could you guys test with xserver-xorg-core 2:1.4.1~git20071117-1 which
>> just got uploaded to unstable? It contains multiple input-related fixes.
> 
> Fixed mine (443471) but reverted back to xserver-xorg-core 2:1.4-3 as
> with 2:1.4.1~git20071117-1 resolution is broken here (HorizSync and
> VertRefresh values are ignored from xorg.conf, i'll double check and
> eventually file a new one ^_^).

Already reported as #451876. Might be fixed soon.

> Strangely enough, it's now working with 2:1.4-3 too. Should i close it
> myself (443471) or should i leave it to the maintainers?

I am closing it. Thanks.

It will close the 3 other bugs automatically. If any of the other
reporters still has the bug, please let me know, I'll unmerge your
bug and reopen it (they could be slightly different).

Brice

--- End Message ---
Reply to: