 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MichaelJF wrote:
> One of the reasons why I didn't tried Suse again with my last private
> machine was that especially the problem of handedness wasn't really
> implented with Suse. One can chance the mouse from right to left
> within the kde but not all programs (even kde-programs) uses this
> settings. So you have a GUI which is left handed but some programs
> (e.g. the file manager) are still right handed, ignoring the kde
> settings completelly. I experienced this again just yesterday with an
> older nachine I have Suse (11.3) running. But since I was trained to
> be right handed during my youth and experienced later that I was left
> handed originally, I can cope with this but it is not convenient.
It should be possible to change that in the configuration of the X-
Server (given Suse does not yet use wayland). Depending on which version
of the X-Server you have and which mouse driver is in use, it works a
little bit differently.
See for example (execute this command in a shell)
man 4 evdev
There you can read this:
Option "ButtonMapping" "string"
Sets the button mapping for this device. The mapping
is a space-separated list of button mappings that cor‐
respond in order to the physical buttons on the device
(i.e. the first number is the mapping for button 1,
etc.). The default mapping is "1 2 3 ... 32". A map‐
ping of 0 deactivates the button. Multiple buttons can
have the same mapping. For example, a left-handed
mouse with deactivated scroll-wheel would use a map‐
ping of "3 2 1 0 0". Invalid mappings are ignored and
the default mapping is used. Buttons not specified in
the user's mapping use the default mapping.
In this case, you would probably put a file mouse.conf in
/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d containing this:
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "mouse"
Driver "evdev"
Option "Device" "/dev/???"
Option "ButtonMapping" "3 2 1"
EndSection
(Older X-Server's need this section in the file /etc/X11/xorg.conf. Just
look wich one of the two already exists. Also see 'man xorg.conf'.)
Note that I don't know what ??? should be. You have to look that up in
the X-Server's log file (/var/log/xorg.log or similar). There you also
see whether it really uses the evdev driver as I assumed. I can help you
with this, if you want. (You can contact me directly per mail for this.)
On the other hand, one would hope that Suse's configuration tool (is it
still called yast?) contains a section for the X-Server. Maybe there is
somewhere another option for left-handed mouses hidden?
Greetings
Urs
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/19/2013 2:23 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> "Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
>> "MichaelJF" <mi-### [at] t-online de> wrote:
>>> With the partitioning my experience so far is that it is
>>> better to have Windows do it itself. Usually this works.
>>
>> This was not possible for me. Windows had conveniently placed some immovable
>> blocks near the far end of the disk, and adamantly refused to shrink the
>> partition.
>>
> Yes, Microsoft tries to do that, but I never experiecened this at that scale. As
> I mentioned my last Suse Installation was some years ago. I experienced that
> Windows allowed for only a part of the hard drive for other systems due to this
> block issue and occupied much more than was needed to run Windows, but it was
> quiet enough to run Suse (if I remember right, windows "needed" a third of a
> Terabyte-harddrive, so 2/3 were free for Linux). May be they have changed this
> policy.
>
> One of the reasons why I didn't tried Suse again with my last private machine
> was that especially the problem of handedness wasn't really implented with Suse.
> One can chance the mouse from right to left within the kde but not all programs
> (even kde-programs) uses this settings. So you have a GUI which is left handed
> but some programs (e.g. the file manager) are still right handed, ignoring the
> kde settings completelly. I experienced this again just yesterday with an older
> nachine I have Suse (11.3) running. But since I was trained to be right handed
> during my youth and experienced later that I was left handed originally, I can
> cope with this but it is not convenient.
>
> Best regards,
> Michael
>
>
It should probably be clear that Windows a) locks certain files, so you
can't move them, **while it is running**, but b) it doesn't actually
care if they are in those places, assuming you can find some way to move
them later, and c) this is likely some sort of quirk in how it installs,
where those files are "low priority, since they load once", allowing for
a small improvement in the OS speed, by leaving the "faster" parts of
the drive free, for all the OS components that get loaded/unloaded,
swapped, and your own programs, etc.
The consequence is that Windows itself won't let you fix the problem,
and it makes resizing the partition effectively impossible, unless your
OS and application can "move" the files first, but.. its not necessarily
intended as a means to screw up multi-boot systems. Its just that, if
you don't prepare for that *before* installing it, they don't give a
shit that it becomes complicated for anyone trying to do so.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 21/04/2013 00:09, Patrick Elliott nous fit lire :
> It should probably be clear that Windows a) locks certain files, so you
> can't move them, **while it is running**, but b) it doesn't actually
> care if they are in those places, assuming you can find some way to move
> them later, and c) this is likely some sort of quirk in how it installs,
> where those files are "low priority, since they load once", allowing for
> a small improvement in the OS speed, by leaving the "faster" parts of
> the drive free, for all the OS components that get loaded/unloaded,
> swapped, and your own programs, etc.
And if you remember (for the old timers), Windows never got the
installation process right since its beginning: installing or removing
an application and you had to reboot.
So, nothing really news under the sun from Redmond.
(there is a joke: "mouse has moved, Windows must be restarted.", but
it's a slight exaggeration)
The classical file-locking of windows is: its DLL/SYS and the swap file.
Usually reducing the allowed swap to 0, or moving it explicitly to
another partition, can help... on the next reboot!
(compacting the file-system usually move the DLL/SYS at the start of the
partition, well, at least it does not put directory at the end of it...
oh compacting is de-fragmenting)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> And if you remember (for the old timers), Windows never got the
> installation process right since its beginning: installing or removing
> an application and you had to reboot.
The most ridiculous thing up to Windows 98 was that if you changed your
network settings (eg. your IP address), you had to reboot in order for
them to take effect.
At least WinXP and newer do the sane thing and let you change them
on-the-fly. There's really not any rational reason not to.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/21/2013 12:41 AM, Warp wrote:
> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>> And if you remember (for the old timers), Windows never got the
>> installation process right since its beginning: installing or removing
>> an application and you had to reboot.
>
> The most ridiculous thing up to Windows 98 was that if you changed your
> network settings (eg. your IP address), you had to reboot in order for
> them to take effect.
>
> At least WinXP and newer do the sane thing and let you change them
> on-the-fly. There's really not any rational reason not to.
>
In all honesty, half the shit that they rebooted for, and even a few
things they still do (usually third party now, it seems), are things
that work perfectly fine without it. I think the main thing they worry
about, in most cases, unless its a core OS component, is that something
may go wrong, like a power outage, and in very rare cases, this *could*
cause a failure of new components to stay properly registered. I.e., the
damn thing might decide to load the "backup" of the registry, or
something, and then all the changes would be wrong for the program in
question.
Mostly, even drivers don't need it any more though.
I am damned glad you can more easily roll those back under 7+ though
now. Had a "optional install", which was supposed to make some speed
improvements in USB 3.0 ports, but, due to some quirk in the install, it
instead disabled the root host for USB entirely, so that no devices
where detected (except, thankfully, by keyboard and mouse, otherwise...
gah!) Had to roll it back, and "bam" the moment it did, it worked again,
no reboot needed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thank you all here.
I know I'm a Little bit late for a response here but RL issues were a little bit
more pressing. My Monika and I had to postpone our marriage again and again due
to the state of health of her father and finally we decided to marry in spite of
his health state. Unfortunatelly he died 5 days before our marriage at Castle
Frankenstein. So we had a marriage and a funeral within a week. Not an easy
thing to cope with. So I was quiet for a while here. I hope you can understand
this special circumstances.
I did not implement the Suse at my new machine, but at my "old" one, which was
defunct with Windows but is now rendering a very complicated Scene under Suse
since some hours. So I have a Windows machine and a Linux machine running (both
core I7) which is wondeful, especially to have Kontact again.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18/05/2013 7:49 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> Thank you all here.
Condolences and congratulations.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-5-2013 21:25, Stephen wrote:
> Condolences and congratulations.
I join Stephen in this indeed.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 18-5-2013 21:25, Stephen wrote:
> > Condolences and congratulations.
>
> I join Stephen in this indeed.
>
> Thomas
Thank you both for the condolences and the congratulations. My first thought
was, that congratulations would have sufficed since his death was a salvation to
all involved persons, especially to himself. As a child he had suffered a lot
during ww2 being driven out of his home land Masuria. He never learned to cope
with that, but learned to use wine to forget all about it. He was - in
consequence - not a very likely person. But you could not know about this.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Blessings can take many forms indeed. It again shows how events from
long ago influence individual people, over several generations in many
cases. It is a sad reminder of the cruelty of our own species.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
