No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

jsutnoni · 2004-11-02 00:08:28

When I boot up the Arch Linux 0.7 beta 2 ISO it brings me to the screen to type arch/setup, but my keyboard does not work. Any suggestions on this. I did try and type arch-noscsi at the boot screen thinking it froze up on me, but i get the same exact thing.

sarah31 · 2004-11-02 00:33:04

usb keyboard? which kernel?

jsutnoni · 2004-11-02 00:34:42

usb keyboard.... both arch and arch-noscsi on the iso disk. im about to try and use a different kb to see if that works.

jsutnoni · 2004-11-02 01:23:03

Works with my backup PS/2 keyboard. Once everything is installed my usb kb seems to work jsut fine.

dp · 2004-11-02 03:17:03

maybe similar to this:

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php? … ight=mouse

lanrat · 2004-11-02 09:49:53

Looks like this is about usb module (frontpage news). It's not a big problem when you only have usb mouse but how can you load the apropriate usb module manually without keyboard ? (assuming you only have usb keyboards around).

BTW That reminds me: "Keyboard error. Press F1 to continue..." (or something like this) from bios errors :-)

paranoos · 2004-11-02 10:32:14

isn't this why the bios has a usb keyboard driver built in? you may have an option saying "USB Keyboard Handled By" and the options are OS or BIOS. you can switch temporarily to bios mode to do the installation...

however, if you ask me, this isn't the friendliest way for the arch install cd to work, and it would be nice if the installer kernel was slightly different from the kernel package.

i remember mentioning this before, but it would be nice if the install cd just had the scsi kernel, so that people wouldn't have to bother choosing. also, we could solve this issue by including usb modules (again, just for the installer kernel). it might be helpful (to some who either don't know or have forgotten which module they need for their ethernet card, for example) to include the hotplug daemon on the disc.

perhaps we could also provide an ftp-install only disc, which doesn't include outdated packages, but simply allow the quickinst script to download and install base packages.

i hate asking developers to just do things for me, so i'd like to offer my help (and i encourage all you other forum-whores to do so as well!)

dp · 2004-11-02 12:10:19

paranoos wrote:

isn't this why the bios has a usb keyboard driver built in?

hmm ... in fact, i would much more like an architecture, where every piece of hardware provides a piece that is plugged in the mainboard and on it, there is a bios-driver that would be the _perfect driver_ for this device and OS-independend ... but this is not that easy implementable (the OS' should use a common protocoll to communicate with the bios and the bios will _know_ how to run hardware)

i'm dreaming ;-)

bogomipz · 2004-11-02 15:04:09

dp wrote:

paranoos wrote:
isn't this why the bios has a usb keyboard driver built in?
hmm ... in fact, i would much more like an architecture, where every piece of hardware provides a piece that is plugged in the mainboard and on it, there is a bios-driver that would be the _perfect driver_ for this device and OS-independend ... but this is not that easy implementable (the OS' should use a common protocoll to communicate with the bios and the bios will _know_ how to run hardware)
i'm dreaming ;-)

But why would Microsoft want this?

dp · 2004-11-02 21:25:37

bogomipz wrote:

dp wrote:
paranoos wrote:
isn't this why the bios has a usb keyboard driver built in?
hmm ... in fact, i would much more like an architecture, where every piece of hardware provides a piece that is plugged in the mainboard and on it, there is a bios-driver that would be the _perfect driver_ for this device and OS-independend ... but this is not that easy implementable (the OS' should use a common protocoll to communicate with the bios and the bios will _know_ how to run hardware)
i'm dreaming ;-)
But why would Microsoft want this?

who cares, what migrosoft would want?

bogomipz · 2004-11-02 22:50:38

dp wrote:

bogomipz wrote:
dp wrote:
hmm ... in fact, i would much more like an architecture, where every piece of hardware provides a piece that is plugged in the mainboard and on it, there is a bios-driver that would be the _perfect driver_ for this device and OS-independend ... but this is not that easy implementable (the OS' should use a common protocoll to communicate with the bios and the bios will _know_ how to run hardware)
i'm dreaming ;-)
But why would Microsoft want this?
who cares, what migrosoft would want?

We need to ask Microsoft for permission first, don't we? Since they are the ones in charge of computers.

(hint; both posts were ment as a joke)

dp · 2004-11-03 13:58:40

bogomipz wrote:

dp wrote:
bogomipz wrote:
But why would Microsoft want this?
who cares, what migrosoft would want?
We need to ask Microsoft for permission first, don't we? Since they are the ones in charge of computers.

- of course

Arch Linux

#1 2004-11-02 00:08:28

No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#2 2004-11-02 00:33:04

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#3 2004-11-02 00:34:42

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#4 2004-11-02 01:23:03

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#5 2004-11-02 03:17:03

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#6 2004-11-02 09:49:53

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#7 2004-11-02 10:32:14

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#8 2004-11-02 12:10:19

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#9 2004-11-02 15:04:09

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#10 2004-11-02 21:25:37

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#11 2004-11-02 22:50:38

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

#12 2004-11-03 13:58:40

Re: No Keyboad with 0.7 beta 2 iso

Board footer