From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RN0lR-0003Cr-6H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 06 Nov 2011 11:19:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2120B21C07B; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 11:19:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8081821C053 for ; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 11:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Nov 2011 11:18:11 -0000 Received: from p54850B02.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO gmx.net) [84.133.11.2] by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 06 Nov 2011 12:18:11 +0100 X-Authenticated: #20088476 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+o+Ad9rqOo+NNAid0lOzuWH6Hf7/BrKh/ueRZyZ8 4UUl6Oyj8Zn8Of Received: by gmx.net (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1001 Meino.Cramer@gmx.de; Sun, 6 Nov 2011 12:18:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 12:18:11 +0100 From: meino.cramer@gmx.de To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Searching for a solution to a logical problem... Message-ID: <20111106111811.GE21654@solfire> References: <20111106064513.GB21654@solfire> <1320577413.3024.3.camel@irena.nc.rr.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1320577413.3024.3.camel@irena.nc.rr.com> User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (Linux) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Archives-Salt: c2bd2170-2920-45d9-963e-4b79ff13a1c6 X-Archives-Hash: a9c5e42c5273bd70ba0c4e744683692a Albert W. Hopkins [11-11-06 12:08]: > On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 07:45 +0100, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The problem for which I am looking for a workaround is not based on > > a bug -- it is a logical problem. > > > > I am using session manager like KDE/Gnome/XFCE and others but openbox > > as a window manager. > > > > The mapping of keystrokes to certain funtionalities is a common > > feature or most applications nowadays. > > > > And with this keymappings there come the conflicting of keymappings > > into existence... > > > > With openbox I have mapped Ctrl-Left and Ctrl-right to next-desktop > > and previous-desktop. > > When starting blender, which is a great keymapper also, I know have > > "lost" the keymapping which is mapped to Ctrl-Left and Ctrl-right, > > since openbox catches this one and blender does not get a glimpse of > > it. > > > > The remapping of "lost keymaps" not always helps, since often used > > functions are mapped to key combos, which can be reached easily. Those > > are used often and therefore overlap often. > > > > Remapping to avoid conflicts then led to situations where a simple > > "del-char" of an editor is mapped to something awful like > > (exaggerated...;) > > > > Since there is one rule in the internet: "You are not the first person > > haveing a certain problem..." I dare to ask :) ..... > > > > Is there any way to ease this situation? > > > > Thank you very much in advance for any help! Have nice sunday! > > Best regards, > > mcc > > What a immensely long way to ask a simple question! > > Here's the simple (and brief answer): > > You can't have an app and window manager use the same keybindings. > AFAIK the window manager will always win. Best solution is to change > the bindings of one or the other. > > Personally, I'd cjamge. (CTRL-Left/Right) is simply too "simple" of a > keybinding to have grabbed at the window manager level. I actually use > CTRL-ALT-Up/Down to switch (vertical) workspaces. I believe > CTRL-ALT-Arrow_keys is the default on most window managers because it's > "sane", which the openbox setting is not. > > The question was not that simple as this answer implies and which convice me again and again to send postings which explain in detail what I really mean.