Numlock as standard?

[Ian Pilcher]

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
========================================================================