On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 04:30:16PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Christophe Fergeau >> <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >This API seems to be very fedora-specific, >> >> The format is more like Linux specific but yeah, currently we only >> need this for Fedora and 'keyboard' command is required in the >> kickstart. > > Ubuntu (and Debian as well I guess) uses a similar but different format, > 'layout_variant' as opposed to the 'layout (variant)' that you suggest > using in the public API. We can easily translate it to their format then? > XkbLayout seems to be quite close to a country > code, so is easy to get from a 'gettext' format. I don't know if i got this. You mean we can guess/derive layout from l10-language param? >> > the way it works on win7 >> > is described there: >> > http://technet.microsoft.com/fr-fr/library/cc749191%28v=ws.10%29.aspx >> > though I did not quite get the format of keyboard layouts >> > >> > void osinfo_install_config_set_l10n_keyboard(OsinfoInstallConfig *config, >> > const gchar *locale, >> > const gchar *keyboard_layout); >> > will probably be more flexible. 'locale' would be in the same 'gettext' >> > format as in other places. Not sure at all what the format of >> > keyboard_layout should be, just that it can be NULL to use the default >> > keyboard layout (which is what we'll want most of the time). >> >> IMO for now we shouldn't set the keyboard layout for windows since its >> autodeteced (right?) from the language params that we do set. We also >> have the API for apps to know if a param is used by a script or not >> and if it is used, if its mandatory. >> >> If we decide to do so in future, we could either figure a way to >> translate from X layouts to locale names or add new param/API to >> set/get locale and declare in windows scripts that they make use of >> this param. > > After looking at how Ubuntu does things, having 2 arguments seems it will > make things less convoluted... while breaking API. From what you said above, I don't see how we cant easily use the same API for Ubuntu/Debian. > And I'd prefer if we spent a bit of time > trying to get the API right now. The API is already there, I'm just trying to decide/fix a format for the argument/param involved. I'm afraid you have missed the best opportunity for discussing these APIs in detail: when they were proposed by Daniel for the first time many months ago. > This API is also missing a way to handle multiple layouts, which at least > Windows and Fedora support, I don't know if this is on purpose? Thats something Daniel can answer with certainty but: a. That should be easy to add support for without breaking API/ABI (e.g allow comma separated list of layouts as the param) later. b. I don't think its very important to allow that so I'll rather leave that out for now. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ virt-tools-list mailing list virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
