Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for RFB Extension Qemu Key Event #447

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

philenotfound
Copy link

Tested against noVNC client.

};
uint32_t nEncodings = sizeof(supported) / sizeof(supported[0]), i;


Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please don't add unrelated whitespace.

@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ enum rfbSocketState {
RFB_SOCKET_SHUTDOWN
};

typedef void (*rfbKbdAddEventProcPtr) (rfbBool down, rfbKeySym keySym, struct _rfbClientRec* cl);
typedef void (*rfbKbdAddEventProcPtr) (rfbBool down, rfbKeySym keySym, rfbKeyCode keyCode, struct _rfbClientRec* cl);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Never ever change existing API - this breaks code for existing users.

@@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ typedef struct _rfbClientRec {
rfbBool useRichCursorEncoding; /**< rfbEncodingRichCursor is preferred */
rfbBool cursorWasChanged; /**< cursor shape update should be sent */
rfbBool cursorWasMoved; /**< cursor position update should be sent */
rfbBool enableQemuKeyEvent; /**< client supports QemuKeyEvent */
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add members at the end of the struct to not break ABI.

@bk138 bk138 added this to the Release 1.0.0 milestone Dec 2, 2020
@bk138
Copy link
Member

bk138 commented Dec 2, 2020

Hi @philenotfound - would love to have an update on this as it would play nicely with #453

@philenotfound
Copy link
Author

Will look into it..

@bk138
Copy link
Member

bk138 commented Apr 28, 2022

Needs rebase, some code changes highlighted above and testing with the client side.

@antenore
Copy link
Contributor

Personally I've a problem with this PR and #453.
This is not standard in the RFB protocol, and it shouldn't be mixed in the main server and client functions.
The best would be to separate any external/3rd parties extensions in external files, but the code is not yet modular and #453 has been already merged.
So finally (after the mentioned changes) it may be merged and only after we can eventually brainstorming about the LibVNC modularity. Anyway it would be a quite huge task, and I'm unsure anyone has enough time for this.

Just my 2 cents…

@antenore
Copy link
Contributor

antenore commented May 9, 2022

@philenotfound do you still want to work on this PR?

@philenotfound
Copy link
Author

I'll probably get to refactoring this in a few weeks.
But if this blocking for you, just close it and I will reopen a new one when I'm done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants