From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KH2Ax-0007t7-PA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:51:35 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KH2At-0007sv-6f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:51:34 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56273 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KH2At-0007ss-1t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:51:31 -0400 Received: from dbservice.com ([213.239.204.14]:47428 helo=matterhorn.dbservice.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KH2As-0000sQ-K8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:51:30 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.27] (gw.ptr-62-65-141-13.customer.ch.netstream.com [62.65.141.13]) by matterhorn.dbservice.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7FB20BB3B6 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:51:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <48766824.5080206@dbservice.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:51:00 +0200 From: Tomas Carnecky MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Bug in SDL key event processing References: <48754975.1050303@dbservice.com> <20080709233752.GL4889@implementation> <48754DF2.2010704@dbservice.com> <20080709235516.GM4889@implementation> <48755320.5090707@dbservice.com> <48757FB8.8010400@codemonkey.ws> <4875C0B6.2060302@dbservice.com> <4876101A.1080800@codemonkey.ws> <487611FC.5070500@dbservice.com> <487616BB.8020402@dbservice.com> <48761F31.4090909@codemonkey.ws> <48762C59.9010204@dbservice.com> <48766211.2090304@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <48766211.2090304@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Anthony Liguori wrote: > Honestly though, this is the first time I've seen this problem come up. > Patches are certainly welcome but this appears to be a very odd case. I > think you're asking for trouble using evdev. I expect distributions and users to use xorg autoconfiguration in the future. It's especially useful for laptop users, because you can plug in devices and they 'just work'. I may be one of the first, but certainly not the only one to ever use evdev. tom