Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #9346 > unrolled thread

OT: For all the Window haters

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi

Contents

  OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-05 21:47 +0100
    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-08-06 00:58 +0100
      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2015-08-06 07:48 +0100
        Re: OT: For all the Window haters David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2015-08-06 08:43 +0100
          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2015-08-06 10:28 +0100
          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-06 09:57 +0000
          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Brian Reay <no.sp@m.com> - 2015-08-06 10:58 +0100
            Re: OT: For all the Window haters Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2015-08-06 14:55 +0100
              Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-06 19:27 +0100
                Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-06 19:46 +0100
                  Re: OT: For all the Window haters Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2015-08-06 20:59 +0100
                  Re: OT: For all the Window haters Graham. <me@privicy.net> - 2015-08-07 00:22 +0100
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-07 17:12 +0100
                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2015-08-07 16:22 +0000
      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-06 09:55 +0000
    Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-06 10:38 +0100
    Re: OT: For all the Window haters druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-07 08:18 +0100
    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Jim Diamond <Jim.Diamond@deletethis.AcadiaU.ca> - 2015-08-07 18:53 -0300
      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-08 08:13 +0000
        Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-08 10:01 +0100
        Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-08 14:14 +0100
          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-08 13:31 +0000
            Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-09 00:14 +0100
              Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-09 07:22 +0000
                Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-09 10:11 +0000
                  Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-09 11:28 +0000
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-08-09 13:30 +0100
                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-09 16:00 +0100
                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-09 18:04 +0000
                          Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-09 20:11 +0100
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-09 14:06 +0000
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-09 21:32 +0100
                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2015-08-09 21:16 +0000
                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-08-10 11:05 +0100
                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-10 13:51 +0100
                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-10 17:13 +0000
                          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-08-11 11:40 +0100
                            Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tony van der Hoff <tony@vanderhoff.org> - 2015-08-11 13:07 +0200
                            Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-11 12:59 +0000
                              Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-08-15 09:44 +0100
                                Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-15 10:07 +0000
                                  Re: OT: For all the Window haters Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2015-08-15 16:13 +0100
                                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-15 19:54 +0000
                                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-15 23:59 +0100
                                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-16 00:13 +0000
                                          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2015-08-16 11:02 +0100
                                            Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-16 12:58 +0100
                                          Re: OT: For all the Window haters Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-16 10:51 -0400
                                            Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-16 19:05 +0000
                                          Re: OT: For all the Window haters druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-16 23:03 +0100
                                            Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-16 22:55 +0000
                                              Re: OT: For all the Window haters druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2015-08-17 21:46 +0100
                                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Mike Fleming <{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> - 2015-08-16 14:26 +0100
                                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-08-16 17:02 +0100
                                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2015-08-16 17:02 +0100
                                        Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-16 19:18 +0000
                              Re: OT: For all the Window haters "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-18 19:39 +0100
                  Re: OT: For all the Window haters The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-09 15:56 +0100
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Tonton Th <tTh@nowhere.invalid> - 2015-08-09 14:59 +0000
                    Re: OT: For all the Window haters Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-09 16:55 +0000
                      Re: OT: For all the Window haters Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-09 16:38 -0400
                Re: OT: For all the Window haters mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-08-09 19:55 +0100

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#9427

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 09:44:36 +0100, Tim Hill wrote:

> In article <mqcrkb$cjq$1@dont-email.me>, Martin Gregorie
> <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:40:49 +0100, Tim Hill wrote:
> 
>> > Forgive my lack of tolerance but I would expect a keyboard which is
>> > said to be compatible (Windows 7-64 in this case) should work in its
>> > entirety
>> >
>> Why? Windows have had a tendancy to support extra non-standard keys
>> (starting with more than the original set of four Function keys
>> popularised by DEC on their terminals). I don't see why any other OS
>> should be expected to either support them or ape what Windows does if
>> they are pressed.
> 
> I expect a statement by the vendor to the effect that a device is
> compatible with X, that the device will work with X in its entirety.
> There were no caveats, so I don't expect any diminished functionality.
>
If all the normal keys, i.e. those shown in a standard national keyboard 
map, work as advertised by generating the expected codes when those keys 
are pressed, then the keyboard is fully functional by definition. 

If a manufacturer chooses to add extra keys whose functions are specific 
to particular computers or operating systems there's no reason to expect 
any other hardware or OS to respond to them: they are nonstandard 
additions and so not responding to them is not in any way 'reduced 
functionality'. 
   
BTW, can you point to *any* statement by a keyboard vendor claiming Linux 
compatibility for their keyboard? If so, post the URL.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9431

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
 
> BTW, can you point to *any* statement by a keyboard vendor claiming
> Linux compatibility for their keyboard? If so, post the URL.
> 
Really?  Here's one: http://www.logitech.com/en-gb/product/k120?crid=26
(click on the Specifications tab).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9433

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:13:01 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
> Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>  
>> BTW, can you point to *any* statement by a keyboard vendor claiming
>> Linux compatibility for their keyboard? If so, post the URL.
>> 
> Really?  Here's one: http://www.logitech.com/en-gb/product/k120?crid=26
> (click on the Specifications tab).

Yes, really. Dig deeper: Linux support is so old its got grey hair: 
kernel 2.6+, yet. 

No Linux software or drivers are provided and no documented support for 
Windows-specific keys under Linux, i.e. no documentation about the codes 
output if they're pressed, hence nothing that Tim Hill seemed to think 
was supposed to make any or all extra keys work with any and all 
operating systems is mentioned at all. 


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9434

On 15/08/15 20:54, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:13:01 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
>> Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, can you point to *any* statement by a keyboard vendor claiming
>>> Linux compatibility for their keyboard? If so, post the URL.
>>>
>> Really?  Here's one: http://www.logitech.com/en-gb/product/k120?crid=26
>> (click on the Specifications tab).
>
> Yes, really. Dig deeper: Linux support is so old its got grey hair:
> kernel 2.6+, yet.
>
> No Linux software or drivers are provide

why would they need to be?

and no documented support for
> Windows-specific keys under Linux,

Just because it ain't documented doesn't mean it ain't supported

  i.e. no documentation about the codes
> output if they're pressed, hence nothing that Tim Hill seemed to think
> was supposed to make any or all extra keys work with any and all
> operating systems is mentioned at all.
>

Keys are not operating system dependent,. they are window manager 
dependent usually.

Logitech works with Gnome 2?

That do ya
?

>


-- 
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in 
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in 
someone else's pocket.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9435

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 23:59:54 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Just because it ain't documented doesn't mean it ain't supported
>
Doesn't mean its supported either, which is what I was pointing out.

As an example of what I was getting at, on this Lenovo R61i laptop, 
looking at the bottom row of keys:
-the Windows key does nothing
-AltGr does nothing thet I can see except to cause read() to 
 return EOF and set errno so that strerror() returns "Success",
-The pop-up menu key works (I'm using XFCE)
-The 'page forward' and 'page backward' keys are grabbed by Firefox,
 which uses them the page forward and backward though nothing else 
 seems to see them. NOTE: these are NOT PgUp and PgDn, but different
 keys that complete the 6 key cursor block:

  Pageback | Up | Pageforward
  Left     |down| Right

There are some -Some of the 5 Lenovo blue-top keys (supposedly activated 
by the blue Fn key do something useful (screen brightness up/down, 
suspend, sleep, keyboard_light_on/off all work but the other 11 don't.
  
> Keys are not operating system dependent,. they are window manager
> dependent usually.
> 
A bit more than that, unless the WN in intercepting and actioning thre 
blur Lenovo keys.
 
> Logitech works with Gnome 2?
>
I wouldn't know: after a progressively worse experience with Gnome 2.2x 
in the run up to the heebious full blown Gnome 2 I dropped it in favour 
of XFCE, which does what I want without any of the Gnome crew's "We know 
what you want better then you do" nonsense.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9436

In article <mqokii$jn9$1@dont-email.me>, martin@address-in-sig.invalid 
says...
> 
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 23:59:54 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
> > Just because it ain't documented doesn't mean it ain't supported
> >
> Doesn't mean its supported either, which is what I was pointing out.
> 
> As an example of what I was getting at, on this Lenovo R61i laptop, 
> looking at the bottom row of keys:
> -the Windows key does nothing
> -AltGr does nothing thet I can see except to cause read() to 
>  return EOF and set errno so that strerror() returns "Success",
> -The pop-up menu key works (I'm using XFCE)
> -The 'page forward' and 'page backward' keys are grabbed by Firefox,
>  which uses them the page forward and backward though nothing else 
>  seems to see them. NOTE: these are NOT PgUp and PgDn, but different
>  keys that complete the 6 key cursor block:

By the '6 key cursor block' you mean the keys of the multimedia and 
power sections of keyboard mapping, extracted below from one of my 
spreadsheets for decoding PS2 keycodes from an Arduino project for 
US,UK,FR, DE keyboards. Standard key definition and Make code are

Next Track	E0, 4D
Previous Track	E0, 15
Stop		E0, 3B
Play/Pause	E0, 34
Mute		E0, 23
Volume Up	E0, 32
Volume Down	E0, 21
Media Select	E0, 50
E-Mail		E0, 48
Calculator	E0, 2B
My Computer	E0, 40
WWW Search	E0, 10
WWW Home	E0, 3A
WWW Back	E0, 38
WWW Forward	E0, 30
WWW Stop	E0, 28
WWW Refresh	E0, 20
WWW Favorites		E0, 18

Power		E0, 37
Sleep		E0, 3F
Wake		E0, 5E

They are plenty of sites that list these keymappings.

Assigning them to do something is the job mainly of APPLICATIONS
or background process of Window Managers not OS.

The GUI keys (Windows keys), menu key etc are still the pervue of the
Window Manager in Linux systems.
 
>   Pageback | Up | Pageforward
>   Left     |down| Right
> 
> There are some -Some of the 5 Lenovo blue-top keys (supposedly activated 
> by the blue Fn key do something useful (screen brightness up/down, 
> suspend, sleep, keyboard_light_on/off all work but the other 11 don't.

Because they relate to BIOS level functions that are not passed even to 
OS. The others require interaction no doubt with drivers for things
like volume control and muting, and are actually aprt of the set above.
   
> > Keys are not operating system dependent,. they are window manager
> > dependent usually.
> > 
> A bit more than that, unless the WN in intercepting and actioning thre 
> blur Lenovo keys.

-- 
Paul Carpenter          | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/>    PC Services
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/pi/>  Raspberry Pi Add-ons
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9437

On 16/08/15 11:02, Paul wrote:
> are still the pervue
Purview

Or possibly purlieu


  A perv-ue is  what you get from a 'what the butler saw' machine...;-)

-- 
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in 
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in 
someone else's pocket.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9439

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 00:13:06 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> declaimed the following:


>There are some -Some of the 5 Lenovo blue-top keys (supposedly activated 
>by the blue Fn key do something useful (screen brightness up/down, 
>suspend, sleep, keyboard_light_on/off all work but the other 11 don't.
>
	Probably intercepted by the BIOS layer and never even passed on to the
OS.
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
    wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9442

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:51:01 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 00:13:06 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
> <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> declaimed the following:
> 
> 
>>There are some -Some of the 5 Lenovo blue-top keys (supposedly activated
>>by the blue Fn key do something useful (screen brightness up/down,
>>suspend, sleep, keyboard_light_on/off all work but the other 11 don't.
>>
> Probably intercepted by the BIOS layer and never even passed on to the
> OS.
>
I assume you mean the ones that work? If so, I'd agree: there would seem 
to be little sense in letting Linux catch them and issue a call-back to 
the BIOS. 

Presumably the OS is meant to register to handle the others?


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9444

On 16/08/2015 01:13, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> I wouldn't know: after a progressively worse experience with Gnome 2.2x
> in the run up to the heebious full blown Gnome 2 I dropped it in favour
> of XFCE, which does what I want without any of the Gnome crew's "We know
> what you want better then you do" nonsense.

Try Mate, its what Gnome should be, and is available in Wheezy, but even 
better in Jessie.

---druck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9445

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 23:03:11 +0100, druck wrote:

> On 16/08/2015 01:13, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> I wouldn't know: after a progressively worse experience with Gnome 2.2x
>> in the run up to the heebious full blown Gnome 2 I dropped it in favour
>> of XFCE, which does what I want without any of the Gnome crew's "We
>> know what you want better then you do" nonsense.
> 
> Try Mate, its what Gnome should be, and is available in Wheezy, but even
> better in Jessie.
>
Sorry, I should have been clearer: I use the XFCE WM on my Intel/AMD 
boxes which all run Fedora Linux. My RPi is run headless at runlevel 3, 
so everything I do on it is via the bash shell in an SSH session.
 

-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9448

On 16/08/2015 23:55, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> Sorry, I should have been clearer: I use the XFCE WM on my Intel/AMD
> boxes which all run Fedora Linux.

Well Mate is available for Fedora, so is the Gnome 3 based Cinnamon, but 
I prefer the former.

> My RPi is run headless at runlevel 3,
> so everything I do on it is via the bash shell in an SSH session.

Mine is mostly used from the shell, but as its a Pi2 the desktop is very 
usable via xrdp.

---druck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9438

In article <mqo5eh$39r$1@dont-email.me>, Martin Gregorie
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> writes:

> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 16:13:01 +0100, Rob Morley wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
> > Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> >  
> >> BTW, can you point to *any* statement by a keyboard vendor claiming
> >> Linux compatibility for their keyboard? If so, post the URL.
> >> 
> > Really?  Here's one: http://www.logitech.com/en-gb/product/k120?crid=26
> > (click on the Specifications tab).
> 
> Yes, really. Dig deeper: Linux support is so old its got grey hair: 
> kernel 2.6+, yet. 
> 
> No Linux software or drivers are provided and no documented support for 
> Windows-specific keys under Linux, i.e. no documentation about the codes 
> output if they're pressed, hence nothing that Tim Hill seemed to think 
> was supposed to make any or all extra keys work with any and all 
> operating systems is mentioned at all. 

I don't believe that Tim Hill mentioned Linux at all when on about his
Logitech keyboard. He was talking about Windows 7 64-bit.

-- 
Mike Fleming

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9441

In article <8q31ta1oa0tq902u6sf92g6c51kuo9cjhh@4ax.com>, Mike Fleming
<{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> wrote:

[Snip]

> I don't believe that Tim Hill mentioned Linux at all when on about his
> Logitech keyboard. He was talking about Windows 7 64-bit.

Thank you.

-- 
from Tim Hill who welcomes incoming email to tim at timil dot com.
* Share in a better energy supplier: http://tjrh.eu/coopnrg
* Share in cheaper ethical telecoms: http://tjrh.eu/phone
* Have a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9440

In article <mqo5eh$39r$1@dont-email.me>, Martin Gregorie
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:

[Snip]

> No Linux software or drivers are provided and no documented support for
> Windows-specific keys under Linux, i.e. no documentation about the
> codes output if they're pressed, hence nothing that Tim Hill seemed to
> think was supposed to make any or all extra keys work with any and all
> operating systems is mentioned at all. 


I didn't say anything of the sort.

In future, please quote what I write and remove your personal filter of
what you think I said.

-- 
from Tim Hill who welcomes incoming email to tim at timil dot com.
* Share in a better energy supplier: http://tjrh.eu/coopnrg
* Share in cheaper ethical telecoms: http://tjrh.eu/phone
* Have a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9443

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 17:02:01 +0100, Tim Hill wrote:

> In future, please quote what I write and remove your personal filter of
> what you think I said.
>
Quoting you wasn't possible since the post I replied to contains nothing 
written by yourself.

Kindly clarify what you meant by Operating System 'X' in what you *did* 
write. 

Your content in a previous post certainly reads as if 'X' means 'any OS 
mentioned by the supplier in the device specifications'.

In the keyboard spec supplied by Rob no key assignments were given 
anywhere and the only software on offer was Windows drivers. I couldn't 
see any specific support details for OX X or Linux though all three OSes 
were mentioned as supported, so it doesn't look as if conforms to your 
expectations.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9449

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:59:55 +0100, Martin Gregorie  
<martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:40:49 +0100, Tim Hill wrote:
>
>> Forgive my lack of tolerance but I would expect a keyboard which is said
>> to be compatible (Windows 7-64 in this case) should work in its entirety
>>
> Why? Windows have had a tendancy to support extra non-standard keys
> (starting with more than the original set of four Function keys
> popularised by DEC on their terminals). I don't see why any other OS
> should be expected to either support them or ape what Windows does if
> they are pressed.
>
> OTOH, as I showed, its not hard to see what character sequence the key
> generates and then use xmodmap to map the key to do something useful.
>
>> I am sure that in all sorts of OSes I can use all sorts of utilities to
>> make use of the extra keys but (a) there are not enough hours in the day
>> and (b) 'compatible' and plug'n'play mean what?
>>
> Some things are useful: I've remapped CapsLK so it only works in shift
> mode because, on this keyboard, I find I'm fat-fingering CapsLk too
> often. Researching and carrying out this remapping was time well spent
> for me, but ymmv.
>
>
Well OT, but for Windows I use CapsUnlock (from BrainSystems)

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9395

On 09/08/15 11:11, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> everybody whose display hardware used 8250 UARTs
> probably had to upgrade to 16550s at some point.

Still wouldn't have actually produced a usable display, since those are 
in fact Serial port UARTS.


-- 
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in 
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in 
someone else's pocket.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9396

On 2015-08-09, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> everybody whose display hardware used 8250 UARTs
>> probably had to upgrade to 16550s at some point.
>
> Still wouldn't have actually produced a usable display, since those are 
> in fact Serial port UARTS.

   My ADM5A is currently driven by a 16550 UART under Linux
   and can display asciipr0n !

-- 
<<<     http://la.buvette.org/photos/myrys/20ans/avance-rapide.avi 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9399

On Sun, 09 Aug 2015 15:56:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 09/08/15 11:11, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> everybody whose display hardware used 8250 UARTs probably had to
>> upgrade to 16550s at some point.
>
> Still wouldn't have actually produced a usable display, since those are
> in fact Serial port UARTS.
>
Yes, of course I know that. Picked as an example of a hardware 
enhancement that most people would recognise and that almost certainly 
forced a driver modification when it was introduced.

Switching non-graphical displays away from MC6845 CRTC chips (which were 
widely used with non-Motorola chipsets too) to more complex, functionally 
integrated chips would be another example. 
 

-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi

csiph-web