Among laptops, it is common to come across the problem of stuck keys. Keys that continually send a signal even when they are not pressed, as a result of a short contact in the keyboard.
In most cases it is easy to find the offending key - just open a text editor and the output text will reveal the culprit with a long stream of repeated letters/numbers.
But, ghost keys are a bit difficult to identify - which is why they are so named. And these are usually the Function keys. The problem with having a stuck F2 is that it interrupts the booting process, unless another key is pressed after which things remain normal. Even normal working on the desktop is not effected in most cases, so you don't bother about it, untill you reboot the machine and have to nudge the system to continue from the interrupted state.
REcently I faced this problem, and the easiest solution to the issue was to use a live linux CD. Once the system starts to load itself into RAM, the log messages are displayed - this may not be the default behaviour in most cases, since a static loading page could be shown with a message to press any key to view messages, do so. The constant stream of output from the function key in the midst of log messages will give away the defective key. The output will be in a cryptic form and not "F4" or something similar, but comparing it with the output of all the Function keys will be adequate.
In the latest case, I had a tough time with the F10 key, with the only indication once the desktop was loaded was that the right click menu would disappear as soon as it appeared. With the live CD, I could find the output code and match it with F10. The F10 key was disabled permanently.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Ghost ( key ) busting with Linux
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Hibernate out of sight
For so long I was unaware of the facility to hibernate. The speed with which a system can be brought up from the dead makes hibernating a really attractive option. But, I had assumed that Linux did not have this feature, and didn't bother with going online to search for options.
Today, which trying to find a way to check the laptop battery status when confronted with a low battery alert, I came across Kpowersave.
It is nowhere to be seen - not in the Desktop control panel or the Admin YAST panel. And probably, considering it as superfluous, probably I had disabled it's autoloading at boot time. Nonetheless, after going through all menus with a fine comb, I found it under System - Desktop Applet.
I sucessfully brought back the system from hibernate position, though I think the time it took was just as much as a normal startup. Kpowersafe also allow modifying the low battery handling process.
BSD = BloodSheD
Recently got an opportunity to try BSD (FreeBSD to be exact). Considering myself comfortable with Linux and all, I thought it would be a joyride.
Let's just say, BSD is Linux about a decade back. And as I have stated elsewhere, those who say that Linux is not ready for the big time, should spend time with BSD.
I am not sure about the origins of the disk partitioning scheme in BSD. Why make a simple task of partitioning, complicated by bringing in "Slices"? I would hope there is some performance advantage. There better be.
With a partitioner that does not do resizing, FreeBSD simply cuts off a vast proportion of people with little knowledge of manipulating partitions. Linux scores high here, since even novices can easily create blank space by squeezing existing partitions, and the tool is quite reliable as well.
Then there is the slicing operation which confused me a bit.
The whole OS installation is primitive, brought back memories of the CGA esqe Slackware installation routine. This was a bit more haphazard. There are three CDs (or a single DVD ) containing the packages, and the installation is not properly scheduled. So, try installing the KDE package, and the dependencies are sprawling over all three CDs requiring switching CDs furiously. It would seem more orderly to organise the packages sequentially on the CDs to reduce this switching.
Post installation, even if KDE is installed, you are dumped to a boot prompt. Unless you have already read about the editing the ttys file. In which case, the installer will launch a text editor to do the editing. I must stress here that this is the only area where BSD trumps Linux by a vast margin - the editor. vi is so annoyingly thick, that ee (the editor) seems like a genius. And ee is not there in my Opensuse 10.3. Sad indeeed.
Even after editing the ttys file, and getting into KDE, the lack of proper integration between the windows manager and the kernel leaves one returning to the command line for many tasks - some as routine as mounting a thumb drive (no automouting please, we are BSD). wvdial didn't work but pppd did, K3B would not recognise the PATA writer (requiring a lot of googling for an answer), wine installed and the only bright spot in the experiences, besides discovering ee, was I could install and run Opera 10 without hitch.
Eventhough I had downloaded the three isos over a GPRS connection (30 hours in all), I deleted them since I had no plans to return to BSD. The history is quite interesting - BSD v/s Linux, that is. It would not require great intelligence to see that the only thing that differentiates between BSD and Linux is the large band of contributors backing the latter. And the hand of fate, that took the form of a lawsuit to temporarily thwart BSD when Linus was seeking contributors for his pet project is for conspiracy theorists to ponder on.