The mouse was on a PS2 adaptor previously, that is what it would not work right on. The PS/2 adaptors do not work with the keyboard, I already tried, and others online said it’s a mouse-only accessory. …I don’t think hardly any mouse nowadays really comes with a PS/2 plug, all the recent ones I have seen were USB with a PS/2 adaptor. And when I bought the keyboard the copy said it had a PS/2 plug but they lied.
…And what I hate about USB mice+keybords is that they are not functional until the OS has fuly booted, which it doesn’t always do every time–or you stop it from doing, in order to make necessary adjustments. Especially for a Linux machine, I would have preferred PS/2 plugs.
~
Try what I suggested above. Use your favorite terminal and text editor to open “/etc/X11/XF86Config” and see if it has what I’ve written above. Usually all it takes is to modify protocol to imps/2, add the zaxis mapping line, restart X, and the scroll will work correctly.
And he didn’t seem to get exactly what that meant. XFree86 is included in virtually every Linux distro in existence nowadays, so it may as well be considered part of the OS. Especially since “Linux” by a technical definition just means the kernel and nothing else. Should we tell people that they’re having a problem with HURD when their Linux installs are acting up?
HURD is most of the rest of a minimal Linux install - outside the Kernal, the software comes from the older HURD project. It’s a silly acronym that circularly references another silly acronym. Duh.
That doesn’t mean that these distinctions are useful or relevant in the slightest way for the discussion. A user who doesn’t know what XFree86 is (not claiming the OP doesn’t, but he hasn’t shown he does either) gets nothing out of the explanation that XFree86 is broken. I chimed in because the answers to the questions were pretty much unhelpful. If maintaining technical exactitude is more important than coming up with a helpful, useful response, then I guess I see why calling tech support is so irritating.
Just a minor quibble; Opera’s share hasn’t fallen, it’s been consistent at about 2% for the last year, if you believe the W3C. Most of Firefox’s gains have come out of IE, which is As It Should Be. Regardless, though, I think the number of websites designed with Opera specifically in mind was always minimal (alright, zeroish), and will continue to be. Opera has become much better at rendering the vast majority of sites, however, since the development crew there is really quite good at balancing standards-compliance with quirk tolerance. Practically the only problems I come across these days are sites which detect my browser and deliberately break themselves if they don’t find IE/Netscape/Mozilla. Strangely, these aren’t generally MS sites these days.
That said, I’ve never found the Linux version of Opera to be as polished as the Windows one. The rendering engine is the same, of course, but the UI widgets and general stability don’t seem to be all that hot.
No, that’s not a usage I’ve ever heard and I actually use Linux. You could be right and I could have missed out on a usage that you have heard of, but it’s rather more likely that you are wrong.
Technically speaking, the minimal Linux install is a kernel. That’s it. You can add on a libc and a shell and all of the utilities, but they should not be confused with what Linux actually is.