Re: uniform input device packets? (fwd)

Mathieu Bouchard (boum01@UQAH.UQuebec.CA)
Thu, 9 Jul 1998 06:21:02 -0400 (EDT)


resending, mail problems

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 13:53:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Bouchard <boum01@uqah.uquebec.ca>
To: lorrain@sony.de
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: uniform input device packets?

did i reply to this?

> > Not restricting it to /dev/keyboard or such might introduce
> > security problems though, and most of all, I consider that "normal"
> > applications shouldn't be using /dev/keyboard directly.
> What do you call a normal application ? Midnight Commander,
> editors using Control-Return or Alt-Tab should not be normal ?

that's because you won't be able to use them remotely. This stuff belongs
more to a "loadkeys" config (and the introduction of a similar concept at
the XTerm level)

> > > Midnight Commander uses the mouse, and a lot of editors could
> > > also if there was one simple system, available in text and graphic
> > > mode (transparently). The VT1200 system is simple enought to
> > > manage text-mode menus with mouse on a 9600 baud line.

Look, if you think VT1200 is a solution, go ahead; maybe in 2001 your
code will be in the kernel and ours won't, or the reverse, who knows.

> Did not know this one. How does it interract with gpm ? Can you
> use "gpm -R" and read the mouse information (converted to
> MouseSystem protocol) in "/dev/gpmdata" while in console mode ?
> Does that work transparently in an Xterm, i.e. the mouse events
> goes to gpm, then to X, then converted back to MouseSystem protocol
> to be send to curses ?

I don't know. Whoa, i feel like i've already replied to this msg a week
ago, but your msg wasn't correctly flagged "answered"?

> system already give complete access to keyboard and screen - if
> not disabled, data received for printer can be piped to /dev/lp,
> managed in the same way as /dev/tty* <-> /dev/tty, protected with
> standard chmod.

ok

> > heavily unrelated. I cannot reply to most of your message while keeping
> > in mind our project, simply because it's not related. So I'd like to keep
> > the thing to a minimum and then you'll do all the clever things you wish
> > on the top of it.
> I just wanted to describe the current situation. If you want
> to change some things, please try to simplify this system...

which, mine, or yours? :-) i'm a little confused in all of this...

> > For normal applications, it wouldn't even matter, it would just cut some
> > duplicate stuff out of svgalib/X/gpm/dosemu and friends, and make them a
> > little less dangerous as well.
> But svgalib/X/gpm/dosemu would use your protocol after - take care
> of a Xterm running dosemu - where the user want to X cut&paste.

wouldn't you use Xdosemu instead? such a console dosemu, anyway, couldn't
run in a "normal" XTerm, if it doesn't use a /dev/tty...

... and if it does, it can cut+paste. so?

(is it okay, did i stick my foot in the mouth??)

matju

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu