[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: etch and several problems



I had the same problem with my keyboard today.
Don't know what's exactly the reason, but you can fix it by adding
layouts manually. Read /etc/xkb/x11/README.config and edit keyboard
section of /etc/x11/xorg.conf - add layouts and switches.

(I also deleted normal user account and directory and created it again
before editing xorg.conf - don't know if it's necessary).

Good luck,

Andrius


On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:23:46 -0500
lostson <lostson@lostsonsvault.org> wrote:

> Hello
>  I have done a fresh install of etch today and once installed I did a 
> apt-get update then apt-get upgrade. Set up the whole system like I
> like it and then rebooted. Got to the
> 
>  Begin root file something in the boot process and it froze
> eventually dropped me into some type of useless bash prompt. So after
> some reasearch on google found some info on initramfs possibly being
> the culprit. So I reinstalled again and did the above mentioned apt
> process and saw that initramfs was in the upgradeable package list so
> I aborted. Figured I would leave it for a few days. Then I went into
> gnome to setup my keyboard and selected my keyboard in the keyboard
> setup and all of a sudden X went balistic flashing in and out. Keeps
> dropping me back to gdm. What the heck is going on!! I know etch is
> technically "testing" so I assume I cant blame anyone else but myself
> but this is getting ridiculous lately. Everytime I update and upgrade
> I am worried about things breaking and sure enough they do.  I love
> debian but do not want to drop down to stable. Maybe its time to look
> into mepis or ubuntu. Anyone have problems like this as well lately.
> I thought I saw some mail on the list with similiar problems. What
> does one do to combat this, I cant have my system breaking every
> other day where I have to reinstall or spend hours trying to figure
> out what went wrong, thanks.
> 
>  LostSon
> 
> http://www.lostsonsvault.org
> 
> 



Reply to: