Numlock as standard?
Ian Pilcher
i.pilcher at comcast.net
Wed Aug 17 16:30:28 UTC 2005
Henry Hartley wrote:
> You could just turn it on in the BIOS. Oh, wait, that doesn't
> work. I still don't understand why Linux cannot simply abide
> by the BIOS setting and leave numlock alone. Even Windows 95
> got that right.
Here's an alternative approach:
xmodmap -e 'keycode 79 = KP_7 KP_Home' \
-e 'keycode 80 = KP_8 KP_Up' \
-e 'keycode 81 = KP_9 KP_Prior' \
-e 'keycode 83 = KP_4 KP_Left' \
-e 'keycode 84 = KP_5 KP_Begin' \
-e 'keycode 85 = KP_6 KP_Right' \
-e 'keycode 87 = KP_1 KP_End' \
-e 'keycode 88 = KP_2 KP_Down' \
-e 'keycode 89 = KP_3 KP_Next' \
-e 'keycode 90 = KP_0 KP_Insert' \
-e 'keycode 91 = KP_Decimal KP_Delete'
This reverses the meaning of NumLock. When it's *OFF* the numeric
keypad keys will generate numbers; when it's *ON* they will generate
Insert, Delete, PgUp, PgDn, etc.
--
========================================================================
Ian Pilcher i.pilcher at comcast.net
========================================================================
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list