qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Draft patch to permit use of Meta for SDL QEMU GUI


From: Michael Tokarev
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Draft patch to permit use of Meta for SDL QEMU GUI
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:57:18 +0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110805 Icedove/5.0

Replying to an old message...

On 06.08.2008 20:54, Drake Wilson wrote:
> Hello, qemu-devel!
> 
> I use QEMU to run virtual machines on a Debian GNU/Linux machine with
> AMD64 PC-class hardware.  My X keyboard configuration uses Meta
> instead of Alt; even though I have a PC-style keyboard whose keys are
> labeled Alt, they are assigned to the Meta keysyms.  I don't believe
> this to be unusual.  Unfortunately, it makes it impossible to release
> QEMU input grabs, which is likely related to the Debian bug report at
> < http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=398351 >.
> 
> I've drafted a patch for QEMU's SDL interface to allow the use of
> either Alt or Meta.  This appears to work when applied against either
> Debianized QEMU 0.9.1 or raw QEMU SVN trunk (r4988) on my machine.
> There may be bogosities that I have not noticed, since although it is
> a localized change, I have not extensively read the QEMU source code.
> This patch is attached in unified diff format, applyable with -p0.
> 
> (For those of you reading from the Debian bug, this is slightly
> different than my previous posting there, because I noticed that I had
> created a few redundant whitespace-changes-only hunks by mistake,
> which I have now removed.)
> 
> Comments are appreciated from any related source.  Thanks for your
> attention.  :-)
> 
>    ---> Drake Wilson

This is archived at, for example,
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2008-08/msg00208.html

So far it looks like this is the only report about this problem.
This message has never been answered.

What do people think about this issue now?

(The patch does not apply since the code changed significanly,
but the idea is the same).

Thanks,

/mjt



reply via email to

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