| 1 |
Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Sunday 02 Dec 2012 06:39:16 Yohan Pereira wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Sunday 02 Dec 2012 3:05:21 Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > I'm trying to upgrade from a 3.2 kernel to 3.5.7, but the 3.5.7 kernel |
| 6 |
> > > is unusable because it always puts the keyboard into a mode where it |
| 7 |
> > > maps the numeric keypad to the right-hand home position (J->1, K->2, |
| 8 |
> > > L->3, U->4, etc.). After sshing into the machine and booting back |
| 9 |
> > > into 3.2, everything is fine again. |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > There must have been a new kernel setting that I missed when I did a |
| 12 |
> > > "make oldconfig" which defaults to an unusable settings. I haven't |
| 13 |
> > > been able to come up with a Google search that provides anything |
| 14 |
> > > remotely relevent. |
| 15 |
> > > |
| 16 |
> > > Does anybody recognize this problem? |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > Is this a laptop? with no num pad? On my laptop the numpad is mapped to the |
| 19 |
> > keys like you described, so when Num Lock is toggled those keys function as |
| 20 |
> > the num pad. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> You can check if rc-update -s -v | grep numlock (or rc-status -s | grep |
| 23 |
> numlock) shows it being set, otherwise add it to see if this makes a |
| 24 |
> difference. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I think numlock is on by default in newer kernels -- just turn it off |
| 27 |
with the key -- I am pretty sure even your laptop has such a simulated |
| 28 |
key. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: |
| 32 |
How do |
| 33 |
you spend it? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
John Covici |
| 36 |
covici@××××××××××.com |
Archives