Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-06-01 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Stephen Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Thinkpad 600).  But I'm impressed.  Theoretically, one
> is not supposed to be able to hot swap a PS/2 mouse. 
> But it works.  Kudos to the kernel folks.

The problem has never been that the mouse didn't work after a hot
swap.

The problem is that with PS/2 the power surge on the port, as little
as it is, may well fry your mainboard. Obviously in the last 10 or so
years mainboards have become a bit more resilient to this because
people to tend to accidentally pull a mouse cable every now and then
and plug it back in.

MfG
Goswin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-06-01 Thread Stephen Powell
Well shut my mouth!  I did some testing this past
weekend, as I said I would, and results are better
than expected.  First, leaving things the way I had
them configured (X pointing to /dev/gpmdata and gpm
pointing to /dev/psaux, I unplugged the PS/2 mouse
from the mouse port.  The mouse became dead in both X
and gpm (duh!).  I then plugged it back in again.  It
worked again, both in X and in gpm!  Then I configured
X and gpm both to use /dev/input/mice and turned off
gpm's repeater function.  After restarting both
daemons and verifying that both X and gpm could use
the mouse, I again unplugged the mouse.  Again it was
dead in both X and gpm (duh!).  And again I plugged it
back in and it started working again, both in X and in
gpm, with no action on my part.  I didn't have to
restart the gpm daemon, I didn't have to restart X, I
didn't have to unload and reload a kernel module, etc.
 This is better than I expected.

Of course, this is on a different machine (a Dell
Dimension 4400) than I last tried this on (an IBM
Thinkpad 600).  But I'm impressed.  Theoretically, one
is not supposed to be able to hot swap a PS/2 mouse. 
But it works.  Kudos to the kernel folks.

The repeater function of gpm now appears to be
obsolete, as you say.  I would still like to see gpm
installed by the Debian installer whenever a mouse is
detected on the system in order to allow copy and
paste in a virtual console.  But I'm not going to flog
a dead horse.  The powers that be obviously don't like
that idea.

Thanks to all contributors to this thread.



  


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-30 Thread Stephen Powell
Since my initial post I have done some research on the
subject of mouse support in the Linux kernel.  I can
see now why my suggestion was met with such strong
opposition: it goes counter to the direction the
kernel has been going since 2.5.  With such a sweeping
redesign of mouse support since 2.4, I think I need to
do some experimentation to see if gpm still provides
one of the key benefits that it once provided, namely
the ability to resurrect a dead PS/2 mouse after
unplugging and replugging.  On older kernels, I could
issue the following command which nearly always
regained the use of the mouse in a virtual console:

/etc/init.d/gpm restart

And if X was set up to use /dev/gpmdata, this would of
course also resurrect the mouse in X too.  Thomas
Hood, in his web page for Debian GNU Linux on an IBM
Thinkpad 600, specifically recommends this
(http://panopticon.csustan.edu/thood/tp600lnx.htm). 
However, this information appears to have been written
when he was running a 2.4 kernel.

On my system, gpm is currently configured to use the
legacy mouse port /dev/psaux, but it appears from what
I've read that this "device" no longer gives the
direct access to the physical port that it once did. 
I wouldn't be surprised if gpm has thereby lost its
ability to resurrect the mouse.  I'll do some testing
over the weekend and let you know what I find out.



  


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Peter Samuelson

[Stephen Powell]
> I realize that PS/2 mice were not intended to be hot swapped, but
> "stuff happens".

The kernel 'psmouse' module, and the 'serio' layer that actually talks
to the i8042, actually have much more thorough and robust support for
PS/2 hotplugging than gpm ever did.  The kernel even intelligently
handles PS/2 multiplexing, as seen on many laptops where the trackpad
shares the chip with an external port.  (gpm treats that case as a
single mouse, programmed for some protocol they have in common.)

As gpm co-maintainer I will say that the gpm repeater seems to be
entirely obsolete for all use cases.  (Unless your kernel is pre-2.6,
but Debian no longer supports that.)
-- 
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:22:15PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Which I did many years ago.  But it would still make it easier for
> us dual-use people, and not affect only-gooey users, if gpm were the
> default.

I would like ssh installed by default before gpm, but I don't think we
need to go back to doing that either.  The admin installing the machine
should decide what to add to the base system.

For that matter, gpm is only useful on machines with a mouse, some
machines just have serial consoles.  They have great use of login and
getty, and such, but gpm and X just waste space.

-- 
Len Sorensen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:35:20AM -0700, Stephen Powell wrote:
> Thanks for the update on mouse sharing in newer
> kernels.  I didn't realize that this support had been
> added.  That does take away part of my supporting
> argument for configuring X to use gpm.

It was a very nice improvement.

> I realize that PS/2 mice were not intended to be hot
> swapped, but "stuff happens".  Sometimes the connector
> is loose and falls out, sometimes a mischievous
> co-worker unplugs it as a practical joke, sometimes
> the mouse fails, sometimes someone trips over the
> cord, sometimes the dog chews on it, sometimes an
> inquisitive toddler unplugs it, etc.  Being able to
> recover from these things without requiring a reboot
> (or at least restarting the X server) is a nice
> feature, one that gpm provides.

For a PS/2 port, there is NOTHING software can do to recover.  The
hardware on the majority of PCs requires a reset for the PS/2 port to
come back to life.

gpm is of no help here.  X does mouse handling just as well as gpm does.

> Well, as Scotty of Star Trek fame says, "The more they
> overtink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the
> drain."  (Star Trek III: The Search for Spock)  But
> then again, you could make that argument for the new
> kernel support for mouse sharing too.  Yes, adding
> another layer of software also adds another thing that
> can go wrong.  The key is to make the benefits greater
> than the cost.  I can only say that I have used gpm on
> several different machines under several different
> releases of Linux, and I have never had a bit of
> trouble with it.  In some cases I seem to remember it
> allowing the mouse to work when X couldn't drive it
> directly (the "fups2" protocol came to the rescue). 
> And it has saved my hindquarters when the mouse got
> unplugged somehow.

/dev/input/mice actually has the kernel convert all known mouse formats
to one protocol as far as I know, so all those mouse protocol issues are
gone too.

> I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't
> use the console.  I, for one, use it a lot.  But even
> it it's true, I don't see why a device driver for a
> device that is present on the system shouldn't be
> installed.  Should you not install serial port support
> because most people don't use the serial port?  It
> won't HARM people who DON'T use the console, will it? 
> We're talking about basic hardware support here,
> something that many applications can use -- not an
> application.  Please reconsider.

gpm is NOT a driver.  It is a tool that can use the mouse interface in
the kernel and do useful things with the terminal.  Other programs could
do the same if they wanted to.  it is not a driver though.

-- 
Len Sorensen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 08:16:28AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Where is your data for this assertion?

The number of people that have no idea how to get to the console from X.

Personally I hate dealing with machines that don't have gpm installed,
but I don't want to bloat the base install either.

> This argument would also see the removal of 'login', since that's not
> needed by your putative majority of people who don't log in over
> text-only interfaces.

The default system does not have X.  Not having login prevents you from
working.  Not having gpm is at worst slightly inconvinient.

> This argument fails for the same reason: just because *few* people use
> it is not sufficient reason to drop it from the install. If you don't
> want 'gpm' installed, you need a different argument.

Don't install stuff that is non essential.  gpm certainly is not
essential, so don't install it.  login is essential, so do install it.

-- 
Len Sorensen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 05/29/08 11:25, Frans Pop wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 05/29/08 09:35, Stephen Powell wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't
>>> use the console.  I, for one, use it a lot.  But even
> 
> I work mainly in consoles too but I have no use at all for gpm as my 
> consoles are normally all in a graphical environment (KDE's konsole, either 
> local or ssh sessions).

?  The console is The Console, the keyboard and monitor directly
(or via a KVM switch) connected to the computer.

>> Amen.  This is Debian, not Ubuntu.
> 
> Correct. Which means we have cluefull users who know how to run 'apt-get 
> install gpm' if they are heavy VT users. :-D

Which I did many years ago.  But it would still make it easier for
us dual-use people, and not affect only-gooey users, if gpm were the
default.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

"I must acknowledge, once and for all, that the purpose of
diplomacy is to prolong a crisis.", Mr. Spock
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIPuZHS9HxQb37XmcRAq3vAJ0YHX9Y/5issNu/EJn0e0l93iLOWgCg4x3l
os1HhbzIndBGN3JCXHaVn9I=
=kiRw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Frans Pop
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 05/29/08 09:35, Stephen Powell wrote:
>> I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't
>> use the console.  I, for one, use it a lot.  But even

I work mainly in consoles too but I have no use at all for gpm as my 
consoles are normally all in a graphical environment (KDE's konsole, either 
local or ssh sessions).

> Amen.  This is Debian, not Ubuntu.

Correct. Which means we have cluefull users who know how to run 'apt-get 
install gpm' if they are heavy VT users. :-D

Cheers,
FJP


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Julien Cristau
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:35:20 -0700, Stephen Powell wrote:

> I realize that PS/2 mice were not intended to be hot
> swapped, but "stuff happens".  Sometimes the connector
> is loose and falls out, sometimes a mischievous
> co-worker unplugs it as a practical joke, sometimes
> the mouse fails, sometimes someone trips over the
> cord, sometimes the dog chews on it, sometimes an
> inquisitive toddler unplugs it, etc.  Being able to
> recover from these things without requiring a reboot
> (or at least restarting the X server) is a nice
> feature, one that gpm provides.
> 
If X listens to /dev/input/mice, it doesn't care that you unplugged your
mouse and plugged it again, so I'm not sure what you think gpm provides
here.

Cheers,
Julien


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 05/29/08 09:35, Stephen Powell wrote:
[snip]
> 
>> Given most people don't use the console ever,
>> installing a service that
>> is only for console use by default is simply wrong.
> 
> I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't
> use the console.  I, for one, use it a lot.  But even

Amen.  This is Debian, not Ubuntu.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

"I must acknowledge, once and for all, that the purpose of
diplomacy is to prolong a crisis.", Mr. Spock
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIPslcS9HxQb37XmcRAsuYAKCeyvicHUjRnFrLMUjAptBEWAGVFQCbB08Y
SXKM/1VgwXSniUZUGXddY0U=
=WUBA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-29 Thread Stephen Powell
> With current kernels, if you use /dev/input/mice,
the
> port can be shared
> by gpm and X at the same time, and all mice you
connect
> (no matter what)
> show up in that device.

Thanks for the update on mouse sharing in newer
kernels.  I didn't realize that this support had been
added.  That does take away part of my supporting
argument for configuring X to use gpm.

> Of course PS/2 mice can not be connected while
> the system is on, since the hardware simply is not
> designed for that ...

I realize that PS/2 mice were not intended to be hot
swapped, but "stuff happens".  Sometimes the connector
is loose and falls out, sometimes a mischievous
co-worker unplugs it as a practical joke, sometimes
the mouse fails, sometimes someone trips over the
cord, sometimes the dog chews on it, sometimes an
inquisitive toddler unplugs it, etc.  Being able to
recover from these things without requiring a reboot
(or at least restarting the X server) is a nice
feature, one that gpm provides.

> gpm also leads to a number of complications for some
> users, as seen in the BTS.

Well, as Scotty of Star Trek fame says, "The more they
overtink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the
drain."  (Star Trek III: The Search for Spock)  But
then again, you could make that argument for the new
kernel support for mouse sharing too.  Yes, adding
another layer of software also adds another thing that
can go wrong.  The key is to make the benefits greater
than the cost.  I can only say that I have used gpm on
several different machines under several different
releases of Linux, and I have never had a bit of
trouble with it.  In some cases I seem to remember it
allowing the mouse to work when X couldn't drive it
directly (the "fups2" protocol came to the rescue). 
And it has saved my hindquarters when the mouse got
unplugged somehow.

> Given most people don't use the console ever,
> installing a service that
> is only for console use by default is simply wrong.

I'm not sure how one would know that most people don't
use the console.  I, for one, use it a lot.  But even
it it's true, I don't see why a device driver for a
device that is present on the system shouldn't be
installed.  Should you not install serial port support
because most people don't use the serial port?  It
won't HARM people who DON'T use the console, will it? 
We're talking about basic hardware support here,
something that many applications can use -- not an
application.  Please reconsider.



  


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-28 Thread Christian Perrier
Quoting Ben Finney ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) writes:
> 
> > Given most people don't use the console ever
> 
> Where is your data for this assertion?

Probably too wide generalization by Lennart.

My own assertion was that people who use the console *on an enough
regular basis* (ie to do real work) are clever enough to figure out
that using the mouse in the console needs installing gpm.

I think that this assertion is true. Of course, I have nothing to
prove it except common sense (I was about to joke and say that the
people mentioned above are Joey Schulze:-))

> > installing a service that is only for console use by default is
> > simply wrong. The less services need to be enabled by default the
> > better.
> 
> This argument would also see the removal of 'login', since that's not
> needed by your putative majority of people who don't log in over
> text-only interfaces.

...which would mean dropping the possibility of having a basic login
in virtual consoles. Of course, noone will ever think that.

The point I bringed in that discussion is that virtual consoles are
essentially a fallback for the vast majority of users. And one could
assume that a mouse is not strictly needed for a fallback.

> 
> This argument fails for the same reason: just because *few* people use
> it is not sufficient reason to drop it from the install. If you don't
> want 'gpm' installed, you need a different argument.

What we want to bring is that having only few people needing it makes
a good reason to not install it by default (and have it ask questions
to users, indeed).




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-28 Thread Yves-Alexis Perez
On jeu, 2008-05-29 at 08:16 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> This argument would also see the removal of 'login', since that's not
> needed by your putative majority of people who don't log in over
> text-only interfaces.

Do you _really_ think gpm is as important as login?
-- 
Yves-Alexis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-28 Thread Ben Finney
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) writes:

> Given most people don't use the console ever

Where is your data for this assertion?

> installing a service that is only for console use by default is
> simply wrong. The less services need to be enabled by default the
> better.

This argument would also see the removal of 'login', since that's not
needed by your putative majority of people who don't log in over
text-only interfaces.

This argument fails for the same reason: just because *few* people use
it is not sufficient reason to drop it from the install. If you don't
want 'gpm' installed, you need a different argument.

-- 
 \  "The shortest distance between two points is under |
  `\   construction."  -- Noelie Alito |
_o__)  |
Ben Finney


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-28 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 06:49:17AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Not to mention the various remarks that have been made, I would like
> to enhance that ppl who use the Linux console on a regular basis
> (which is usually what motivates activating a mouse on it) are
> perfectly able to know that gpm is the package to install if one wants
> support for the mouse in the console.
> 
> So, do we really want to install/configure GPM for any user of the
> system, knowing that a very large part of users will never use
> itand those who might need it are perfectly able to figure out how
> to do "aptitude install gpm"??
> 
> In short, I don't think that having gpm by default is worth it.

Given most people don't use the console ever, installing a service that
is only for console use by default is simply wrong.  The less services
need to be enabled by default the better.

And installing gpm later if needed still allows it to get along with X
so there is no problem, contrary to the original post.  There was in the
past, but the kernel has improved since then.

-- 
Len Sorensen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-28 Thread Christian Perrier
Quoting Stephen Powell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> This will allow the use of the mouse both in a virtual
> console and in X.  Not only that, but "hot swapping"

Not to mention the various remarks that have been made, I would like
to enhance that ppl who use the Linux console on a regular basis
(which is usually what motivates activating a mouse on it) are
perfectly able to know that gpm is the package to install if one wants
support for the mouse in the console.

So, do we really want to install/configure GPM for any user of the
system, knowing that a very large part of users will never use
itand those who might need it are perfectly able to figure out how
to do "aptitude install gpm" ?

In short, I don't think that having gpm by default is worth it.





signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-27 Thread Joey Hess
Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> With current kernels, if you use /dev/input/mice, the port can be shared
> by gpm and X at the same time, and all mice you connect (no matter what)
> show up in that device.  Of course PS/2 mice can not be connected while
> the system is on, since the hardware simply is not designed for that (I
> believe it can actually be damaged by trying although I have no seen it
> happen.).  On a few systems it seems to work if you plug in a ps/2 mouse
> on the fly, but on the vast majority it does not work until you reset
> the system.  USB mice of course are hot plug and hence much simpler.
> 
> I like gpm, and use it, but I no longer point X at it like I used to
> now that the kernel allows mouse sharing at all times (as long as you
> don't try to use the obsolete /dev/psaux device to access the mouse).
> 
> gpm would also be on the first CD already, if lots of people used it.
> Apparently they do not.

gpm also leads to a number of complications for some users, as seen in the 
BTS.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Re: Mouse configuration during installation needs improvement

2008-05-27 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 12:57:11PM -0700, Stephen Powell wrote:
> Per the suggestion of J?r?my Bobbio when he closed Bug
> # 481514 against installation-reports, I am posting
> this item to the debian-devel mailing list.
> 
> The Debian installer needs some improvement when it
> comes to mouse configuration.  Currently, if the user
> requests a "standard system" and a "desktop
> environment" in the Debian installer, the X Window
> System will be installed in such a way that it drives
> the mouse directly, rather than going through gpm; and
> gpm is not installed.  I recommend that gpm be
> installed whenever a mouse is detected on the system;
> and if the X server is also installed, it should
> always be configured to get mouse events from the gpm
> daemon rather than drive the mouse directly.
> 
> This will allow the use of the mouse both in a virtual
> console and in X.  Not only that, but "hot swapping"
> the mouse will be far less disruptive for X users. 
> When the X server drives a standard PS/2 mouse
> directly, if the user unplugs the mouse and plugs in
> another one while the system is running, he must stop
> and restart the X server, losing all of his X
> applications in the process, in order to regain the
> use of the mouse.  But when using gpm, all he must do
> is stop and re-start the gpm daemon to make the mouse
> work again.  The X server is unaffected and the X
> applications are unaffected.
> 
> With this recommendation, you should also move gpm to
> CD-ROM number 1.

With current kernels, if you use /dev/input/mice, the port can be shared
by gpm and X at the same time, and all mice you connect (no matter what)
show up in that device.  Of course PS/2 mice can not be connected while
the system is on, since the hardware simply is not designed for that (I
believe it can actually be damaged by trying although I have no seen it
happen.).  On a few systems it seems to work if you plug in a ps/2 mouse
on the fly, but on the vast majority it does not work until you reset
the system.  USB mice of course are hot plug and hence much simpler.

I like gpm, and use it, but I no longer point X at it like I used to
now that the kernel allows mouse sharing at all times (as long as you
don't try to use the obsolete /dev/psaux device to access the mouse).

gpm would also be on the first CD already, if lots of people used it.
Apparently they do not.

-- 
Len Sorensen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]