[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Alt vs Meta - Sun keyboard, redhat linux

From: Peter Dyballa
Subject: Re: Alt vs Meta - Sun keyboard, redhat linux
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 23:47:59 +0100

Am 04.01.2011 um 18:12 schrieb chengiz:

On Jan 3, 5:53 pm, Peter Dyballa <address@hidden> wrote:
Why do you think the Alt and Meta key modifiers have something to do
with MS Losedos?

Where do I think that?

Because you inserted the link to some  "Windows-Keyboard".

I think the missing piece is what emacs is doing with Alt_L, as in why it is not processing it as A-.
Here's my xmodmap output:
shift       Shift_L (0x32),  Shift_R (0x3e)
lock        Caps_Lock (0x42)
control     Control_L (0x25),  Control_R (0x6d)
mod1        Alt_L (0x40),  Alt_R (0x71),  Alt_L (0x7d)
mod2        Num_Lock (0x4d)
mod4        Meta_L (0x73),  Meta_R (0x74),  Super_L (0x7f),  Hyper_L
(0x80),  Meta_L (0x9c)
mod5        Mode_switch (0x5d),  ISO_Level3_Shift (0x7c)
I cant tell what to put in my xmodmaprc to make sure emacs behaves

Modifier 5 cannot be Meta, Super, and Hyper altogether.

When you launch GNU Emacs with -Q, without any customisation, does it still interpret Alt as Meta? If so, then my assumption about the parity of the modifiers is wrong and it plays a role that mod1 is Meta and mod2 or mod3 is Alt. Then Hyper and maybe Super can follow, but I think Mode_switch is more important, since it's the compose key, which allows to type ΓΈ as o / etc. Num_Lock can be pretty useless.

In case Alt and Meta work correctly in 'emacs -Q', then something in your or your system's customisation (init files) is exchanging them.



When people run around and around in circles we say they are crazy. When planets do it we say they are orbiting.

reply via email to

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