Talk:Extra keyboard keys

From ArchWiki
Revision as of 14:14, 23 August 2013 by Kynikos (Talk | contribs) (Keytouch: I don't like being accused unjustly)

Jump to: navigation, search

Since i'm a newbie here, I prefer not to do it on my own. IMHO, the organisation should be revamped... I would rather use a "Console" "X.org" split cause xev is of no use in Console, and showkey seems to also be useless in X. I'd add that in many case acpid can be useful for functions key cause independant of X/Console. The fact that the Fn key is sometimes handled in the hardware and invisible to the kernel could be noted too (I searched like 3 hours to get it, searching for where is the error and unable to find it (cause I'm not used to linux and and still don't master logging in linux, so I never thought that it may just be non-existent...) to learn in a random comment on a post that the Fn key sometime just throw a different keycode when pushed... But I don't know if it really belong here, and personally i'd also merge this file with both Extra Keyboard Keys in Xorg and Extra Keyboard Keys in Console, don't know if it's a good idea? I think it's better to not juggle between 32 page cause as a newbie, it's kind of confusing :) Oh, and... should I split my comment in multiple topic instead of one huge? Blakthorn (talk) 14:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Better differentiation needed

Yes, I agree.

showkey and xev report totally different keycodes for media buttons. Getting codes for use in X from showkey is pointless. The article is very misleading. dtw (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


Keytouch

I have added Keytouch to the article, since my original commit at Xfce page was mercilessy cut down by Kynikos, and when I got time to recheck this page, keytouch was not here also. When you will try removing my commits, at least state clear, what you do not like in it. It's frustrating to see my contributions go in vain. ivdok 18:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Keytouch has even a dedicated article, which is clearly linked from the intro of this very article; I should undo your edit once again, but maybe you can do it by yourself this time :) -- Kynikos (talk) 13:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
(For anyone else reading here, see the summary I left when I fixed ivdok's edit and judge by yourself if I stated the reason clearly enough or not) -- Kynikos (talk) 14:14, 23 August 2013 (UTC)