User Feedback :: My numlock key does not work in DSL



DSL must be getting very popular.
As with anything that becomes widely available, the nitpickers appear and  common sense vanishes. Have you ridden a bus lately?.
Keep up the good work 'roberts' et al. There are a lot of us who appreciate and value DSL.
Quote
If my laptop had been destroyed...

It wasn't! There's a huge difference between daemons like ACPI/APM and a flaky light that doesn't come on when the key is functioning properly because of a feature-reduced version of X. I think you've already blown that issue way out of proportion, as evidenced by a bold-lettered wiki entry for something that doesn't even relate to function and then objecting to "fixing" it on your own systems when it's suggested you just install full X.

That's not my definition of constructive criticism. It's the opposite.
Quote (JohnJS @ Jan. 03 2008,08:32)
DSL must be getting very popular.
....  the nitpickers appear and  common sense vanishes...

Agreed. Lets complain about the change log, about a light that does not come on.
About expecting 100% mouseless operation in a 100% graphical environment of 48MB.

Major deficiencies? Oh well. There are many other choices for those who think so.

Can't please everyone.

Thanks for the encouragement and support  it is welcomed always but especially at times like this.

by JohnJS:
Quote
Keep up the good work 'roberts' et al. There are a lot of us who appreciate and value DSL.


Ditto.
I'm completely ignorant about the legal/ethical issues around Wiki documents.  Can anybody post official looking documents and write anything they please?  That seems to be the present case, and there's no disclaimer or name of the author on it that I can see.
The doc in question states:

"A list of unexpected behaviors with the latest versions of Damn Small Linux"

There seems to be considerable disagreement regarding what is "expected behavior" between the author ( a newbee) and the developer, and yet he completely disregards feedback and just upped the ante with another listing  

In any other sphere, this would be grounds for libel, in that it could potentially discourage potential users from trying out DSL and be damaging to the reputation of DSL.   Any lawyers on the board?
Next Page...
original here.