From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by ewsd; Tue Jan 21 03:37:57 EST 2020 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34249221BC for <9front@9front.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:37:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap35 ([10.202.2.85]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:37:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=HXU23f4L2ECIlFaTYsgfi5cQRxy2/IM ufbfSuNa5/ww=; b=lAxfaZJg9AuAjhD5/pdcv9X8RrYQiM9xXHaFtCgHqU0lAbl EFYxAo+wsjwQlcfxbIHj4Rjsujzzv9X/j4jUBGG2/0FZQyTNwjyDOiXa0H0AOoE4 drxkfLvMYbsds+4jL0ATIO3qWxSwNo/fUeLgpZDz3Tn5VOoryMnXpDevYk6xDsK5 9FamDI3H2Tdm3Ur4/XWgQC50GvhC1MAPWInbBc4trkMCJd3u1Po/CPkWEH1oeyTK GcD0M0PDFBBpukPfPK7Ytu5BzIZYYOmXVlBSSGmBYmpSXLza9IoqBMQYPVrp1vdz 036xvmhov/Cq1txHM6Wz7c4rCtRRnKRlUU1FKGg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=HXU23f 4L2ECIlFaTYsgfi5cQRxy2/IMufbfSuNa5/ww=; b=DmGxNFmB6ovdK5OsExkwVu eF4j9AD3nQvcimad66bKidxFQEDZODoWsTObI3g+5a73rUlJGfG4KmWN7mDIUjN6 ub2B1YzK+/Ffr8Gf3ff5tr7KmwDRS+Fz92WkFryOMQNruTlIxN2mhiuH2/w1WHHC 1BDROASG4D8EnDqktQC7UYH5bBF5Kz+nOCyR7OW3NEKUoj9iu3I4yTO3HdxHOO8b 6KkbrYZ4lUUWyXO1NWcnG33AmREJ7CZWJWAmL6j0epxzR4zntq4WOp02s4y6dvdr icpiKYKkQsIKKelu0isfrcDSfja2p0LisHXIGWgVepqKAQkDIZxpnqhb7gLMVLiA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudejgdduudelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucgfrhhlucfvnfffucdlvdefmdenucfjughrpefofg ggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfgfhthhgrnhcuifgrrhgu vghnvghrfdcuoegvvghkvggvheejsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrfhhmqeenucevlhhushhtvg hrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegvvghkvggvheejsehfrghs thhmrghilhdrfhhm X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id D901714C009E; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 03:37:54 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-754-g09d1619-fmstable-20200113v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 08:37:35 +0000 From: "Ethan Gardener" To: 9front@9front.org Subject: Re: [9front] Bounties Content-Type: text/plain List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: compliant progressive database markup interface On Fri, Jan 17, 2020, at 4:05 PM, kvik@a-b.xyz wrote: > > I don't suppose it's hard to write a filter for /dev/kbd in C. > > Indeed. > > > It would have to run before rio. > > There is your problem. And I gave a suitable workaround. > The proverbial shortcut machine needs to have a target rio -- actually a > current window -- bound in its namespace if it is to boss one around. > > I can imagine some elaborate scheme to work around this, taking into > consideration the possibility of having lots of (sub)+rios, but... this > is about as elegant as adding shortcuts you want to rio.c and calling it > a day. I'm not sure why you're saying what you're saying in this post, kvik; subrios wouldn't help at all and a current window makes no sense for something grabbing the keys before rio can see them. Regardless, I more than agree with your final conclusion anyway. It would be more elegant to modify rio itself.