Bug#532995: synclient output for two and three-fingered failure
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 06:55:36PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009, Itai Seggev wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:25:58PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > On Sat, 20 Jun 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > > Here is the output; I can reconfirm that this happens on powerbooks.
> > > > synclient -m 1; registers two fingers, so at least that part is
> > > > working properly.
> > >
> > > Ah, now I see the problem. If I do:
> > >
> > > synclient -s -l; I see that TapButton1 isn't set.
> > >
> > > synclient -s TapButton1=1 TapButton2=3 TapButton3=1; resolves these
> > > issues.
> > >
> > > Itai: doing the above will probably fix it for you too.
> >
> > I tried it, but it didn't have much of an effect. All it did was set
> > two fingers to right click and three fingers to left click, but it
> > had no effect on single finger tap. I can set TapButton1 to pretty
> > much any value without any effect. Is there some other setting I
> > should be mucking with?
>
> What's the ouptut of synclient -s -l; ? Are you changing the values
> using -s?
Sorry it's taken me three months to reply. I thought I had, but apprently
not.
Sometime in the last couple of weeks (new Xserver was put out), the behavior
changed. Now, synclient will allow me to assign all three taps at will.
However, the settings in xorg.conf are completely ignored, and all three taps
are set to zero but defaults. I can work around this by adding synclient to
Xsetup, but it would be nice to understand why xorg.conf is being ignore and if
its possible to fix this.
--
Itai
Itai Seggev, Knox College, Mathematics Department
In 1997 a group of programmers started writing a desktop environment to fix a
travesty they didn't create. Their program promptly found its way onto un*x
systems everywhere. Today, still opposed by a software monopolist, they survive
as soldiers of fortune. If you share their vision, if you know you can help,
and if you can connect to internet, maybe you can join... the K-Team.
Reply to: