texmacs-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Texmacs-dev] Re: [TeXmacs] Re: Modifier mapping suddenly broken?


From: Norbert Nemec
Subject: [Texmacs-dev] Re: [TeXmacs] Re: Modifier mapping suddenly broken?
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:39:32 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.7.1

Am Mittwoch, 1. Dezember 2004 15:37 schrieb Lionel Elie Mamane:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:27:44PM +0100, Norbert Nemec wrote:
> > What I have discovered so far, is that my xmodmap is different from
> > Lionel's:
> >
> >  mod1        Alt_L (0x40),  Alt_L (0x7d),  Meta_L (0x9c)
> >  mod4        Super_L (0x7f),  Hyper_L (0x80)
> >
> > Testing via xev shows, that the Win-key (which used to act as M- in
> > TeXmacs) is actually represented by "Super_L".
>
> Then that key is Super_L and your xkb config should be changed to make
> it Meta_L.

Where is a definitive source about "which key should be mapped to what". 
Somehow, I don't really like the idea of having a non-default mapping, 
because it will most certainly cause bugs in some other corner of the system 
in the worst moment possible.

> > (All of this on a Debian system
>
> Debian woody, Debian sarge, Debian sid? What version of xlibs?

Mostly Debian sarge, xlibs 4.3.0.dfsg.1-8, rebooted every day (i.e. also 
between update and appearance of the problem.)

> > without any personal changes to the configuration.)
>
> Then, the Flag key is not meta, this is "normal". The (IMHO very
> broken, but that's another discussion) default is that the Alt key
> acts as Meta. You need to add the "altwin:left_meta_win" option to
> your xkb config. Do you know how to do that?

This is not about opinions, but about "who sets the standard". Obviously, the 
whole issue was started when the X-developers decided to change their 
opinion. Now nobody knows who actually caused the bug...

If I see it correctly now, altwin:left_meta_win is not set by default. 
Therefore we should expect the dummy user not to have it set either, and 
TeXmacs should work out of the box. Does that mean that my patch should be 
used after all? (As I understand it now, all it does is to check for the case 
that altwin:left_meta_win is not set and work around it.)

> What is your xkb config now (so that I can try to reproduce your
> situation)?

xkb_keymap {
        xkb_keycodes  { include "xfree86+aliases(qwertz)"       };
        xkb_types     { include "complete"      };
        xkb_compat    { include "complete"      };
        xkb_symbols   { include "pc/pc(pc105)+pc/de(nodeadkeys)"        };
        xkb_geometry  { include "pc(pc105)"     };
};


>
> > Am Dienstag, 30. November 2004 21:35 schrieb Lionel Elie Mamane:
> >> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:00:00PM +0100, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:
> >>> Please try to replace the routine
> >>>
> >>> (define (get-default-hyper-modifier)
> >>>   (let ((s (eval-system "xmodmap | grep Hyper_L")))
> >>>     (cond ((string-starts? s "mod")
> >>>     (string-append "Mod" (substring s 3 4)))
> >>>    (else "Mod3"))))
> >>>
> >>> in kbd-config.scm by
> >>>
> >>> (define (get-default-hyper-modifier*)
> >>>
> >>> (define (get-default-hyper-modifier)
> >>>   (with s (get-default-hyper-modifier*)
> >>>     (if (= s (get-default-meta-modifier)) "Mod3" s)))
> >>
> >> It works with "(if (equal? s (get-default-meta-modifier)) "Mod3" s)))"
> >>
> >> Meta is recognised as Meta now. And Alt as Alt. Works.

-- 
_________________________________________Norbert Nemec
         Bernhardstr. 2 ... D-93053 Regensburg
     Tel: 0941 - 2009638 ... Mobil: 0179 - 7475199
           eMail: <address@hidden>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]