VectorLinux
November 26, 2014, 08:00:19 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Visit our home page for VL info. To search the old message board go to http://vectorlinux.com/forum1. The first VL forum is temporarily offline until we can find a host for it. Thanks for your patience.
 
Now powered by KnowledgeDex.
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Please support VectorLinux!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: A question ...  (Read 3612 times)
tomh38
Vectorian
****
Posts: 913



« on: December 14, 2007, 02:32:21 pm »

I'm posting this in this forum just because I'm curious to know whether other people think it's important.

Am I the only one who likes to have numlock on when I log into X?  I like it, I really do.  I hate when after I log in I hit the keypad and don't get a number.

So here I am running VL 5.9 RC1 (waiting for the final to come out before another install).  I figure NumlockX should do the trick.

I downloaded the source for NumlockX 1.1 and tried to use M0E's vpackager to compile it.  No dice.  Then I tried compiling it, y'know, manually, and got an error message telling me it couldn't find the X libraries.  With the fury of a thousand suns I slammed my fists onto my keyboard, and completely by accident a numlockx.SlackBuild file and a slack-desc file downloaded, a terminal opened, and the thing compiled by itself.  I installed it, and it works.  But it's not built specifically for 5.9, plus it wasn't built in a clean build environment, so I can't share it with everyone.

What do you all think?  Is this important enough to have a VL-specific package, or did I damage my prefontal cortex when I bumped my head this morning ('cuz, y'know, that would impair my judgement).

Yeah, I'm off work today.  That's why I'm writing these crazy posts.
Logged

"I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones." - Linus Torvalds, April 1991
exeterdad
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2046



« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2007, 02:37:04 pm »

I use numlock every time I run VL.  Just so much easier for me to type numbers and stuff.  Not convinced that numlock works properly with VL5.9, but I'm the only one that I know that's said anything about it.  It's most likely that I would have interest in that package.
Logged
newt
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1132



« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2007, 03:30:54 pm »

I also MUCH prefer to have numlock on by default.  However, since I like minimal starting services I've never ventured down the numlockX package path......

.....so what was the question? Grin

Yeah, a 59 package of numlockX would be awesome Cheesy
Logged
toothandnail
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2527


« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2007, 04:45:46 pm »

I can see a good case for having numlockx available. Certainly, on a desktop, I prefer having numlock on.

Just please don't do what Zenwalk does. During install, the user is prompted as to whether they want numlock on (which defaults to yes). There are two stages in the Zenwalk setup - one for console and one for X. The console is handled by /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock, and if this is set executable, a test in the GDM init then activates numlockx for X sessions.

The problem with the Zenwalk system is that every time an update to the systemtools package is installed, it comes with a replacement /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock, set executable, naturally. Which is fine for most desktops, but a real pain for laptop users. When an update includes an update to the systemtools package, I always have to remember to go and remove the executable bit on /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock for my laptop, or I can't log in...

There must be a better way of handling it without having to make the user do all the work.

paul.
Logged
Freston
Vectorite
***
Posts: 165


« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2007, 07:19:16 am »

For numerical input the numerical island ... or whatchacallit?? ... is far more suited than the numbers on top of the main keyboard part. So yes, num lock should be on for the machines that have that IMHO.

But on my lappy, without a numerical island, it's crippling. j=1 k=2 l=3 u=4 i=5 o=6 and so on...

So, I beg you, please, whatever you decide, make it easy to change.


Oh! Sorry, responded before reading properly. toothandnail (there must be a story behind a name like that Wink ) already pointed that out.

But to add on that. I know I should chmod -x /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock... but you know... It's a mouseless operation. Kids today wont think of that  Roll Eyes I really think that this is something that should be in KDE's configuration center.


Would it be possible that someone is prompted the first time they press numlock for this question? (Well, it is possible of course... so the real question is, is this worth the trouble??)
Logged
jovanoti
Member
*
Posts: 11



« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2007, 07:28:01 am »

Quote
But to add on that. I know I should chmod -x /etc/rc.d/rc.numlock... but you know... It's a mouseless operation. Kids today wont think of that   I really think that this is something that should be in KDE's configuration center.
It's included in KDE CC already.  Smiley
Since Vector Standard is shipped with XFCE, I think  numlockx is ideal for doing this stuff. Just put it in XFCE Autostarted apps. And yes numlockx, or some other suitable option, must be included in Vector isos.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2007, 07:33:27 am by jovanoti » Logged
lagagnon
Global Moderator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1922



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2007, 07:42:51 am »

Oh no, not the bloody numlock discussion again!. This went on ad infinitum on the release of VL5.8! Please put us out of our misery and stop now!  Wink
Logged

"As people become more intelligent they care less for preachers and more for teachers". Robert G. Ingersoll
SuSE-Refugee
Ex-Officio
Vectorite
****
Posts: 205


Dude In The Snappy Hat


« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2007, 09:02:00 am »

This went on ad infinitum on the release of VL5.8!

Make that: VL4.0, where I brought it up and quite like the versions before as well.
I always found it retarded that a BIOS-setting(Which in most BIOSses is set to "off" by default and it being on hence is a "user-defined prefference") is overridden by the kernel.
It may be my biggest gripe with Linux: Dont mess with MY choices in the BIOS; I put them there for a reason!

I wonder what the hell the reason for this "Daddy-knows-best"-attitude is....
Logged

<Lame sig>
JohnB316
Administrator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1346


Registered Linux User #386728


« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2007, 07:04:41 pm »

---snip---
I wonder what the hell the reason for this "Daddy-knows-best"-attitude is....

To prepare us for a nanny state, LOL! After all, Nanny knows better than Daddy. Tongue

Cheers,
John
Logged

VL 6.0 SOHO latest alpha on one box, VL 5.9 Lite on the other.
metvas
Vectorite
***
Posts: 311


« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2007, 07:46:11 pm »

Hi JohnB
How are things?
Regards
Darrell
Logged

Knowledge is Power, share it.
Be the change you want to see in the World
JohnB316
Administrator
Vectorian
*****
Posts: 1346


Registered Linux User #386728


« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2007, 09:00:42 am »

Darrell,

Things have been a bit hectic, but hopefully they will settle down a bit after Christmas.

John
Logged

VL 6.0 SOHO latest alpha on one box, VL 5.9 Lite on the other.
eco2geek
Member
*
Posts: 10


« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2008, 10:54:00 pm »

Oh no, not the bloody numlock discussion again!. This went on ad infinitum on the release of VL5.8! Please put us out of our misery and stop now!  Wink

Hi, I just installed VL5.9 a few days ago. (Thanks for making it.)

So what was the big deal about numlockx anyway? I had to go get a slackbuild of it and wondered why it wasn't in the repos.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!