Hi Navrocky,

I don't oppose the patch, but I don't really see the use case: you save the clicks to a file, and at a later moment in time you pretend that those clicks have just been clicked?
That could make sense in a testing environment, but you have another use for it?

Also, 'restore' sounds as if you want to restore a previous calibration. However, it looks like you are not restoring (you do not save a previous configuration, but rather the new clicks) but rather emulating? Do you agree?

Kind regards,
Tias

14.02.2014 02:42, Tias Guns пишет:

Hi Navrocky,

I don't oppose the patch, but I don't really see the use case: you
save the clicks to a file, and at a later moment in time you pretend
that those clicks have just been clicked?
That could make sense in a testing environment, but you have another
use for it?

I'm writing a terminal GUI. At the first terminal start it is a
calibration step. I checks that calibration config file isn't exists and
starts xinput_calibrator to generate this one, otherwise I execute my
terminal gui as usual. It's much easier to save calibration results into
the config file than modify X11 config from a batch file.

Also, 'restore' sounds as if you want to restore a previous
calibration. However, it looks like you are not restoring (you do not
save a previous configuration, but rather the new clicks) but rather
emulating? Do you agree?

I confirm that i save user clicks to the file. Restore action just
replays this clicks from the file without showing xinput_calibrator gui.
This method just works as expected for me.

Best regards, Vladislav Navrocky