Talk:ASUS Eee PC 901

From ArchWiki
Revision as of 18:09, 20 April 2009 by Big gie (talk | contribs) (Stock-Kernel VS. recompiled one)
Jump to: navigation, search


Because it doesn't belong to the necessary parts of the articel (every 901-model should be the same) I would suggest removing it or for the sake of completness of the articel moving it at the end of the articel. If noone objects I will move it at the end in the next few days. -- Rorschach

Stock-Kernel VS. recompiled one

What dependencies do people supposedly need to recompile the stock kernel for? (section Option 1: Compile and customize the stock kernel) I didn't recompile my kernel on my 901 and everything I can think of works fine. I think this section should be changed or clarified to explain why its recommended to recompile.

--Chori 13:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT) There are some patches applied to the kernel source: in particular, to the acpi driver, to the mouse driver, to the rt2860sta driver, to improve them, fix bugs, and add functionality. It's true that you can run ArchLinux on the EEE 901 with just the stock kernel; but it's not optimized for it, and many users have experienced problems. Your point is well-taken, however, I'll clarify that section.

--Andyroid 14:05, 20 April 2009 (EDT) Are all the custom kernel methods really necessary at this point when the 2.6.29 kernel makes them pretty much reduntant? At least I think the stock kernel should be presented as option #1 as it is easier to set up and a lot easier to maintain.

--big_gie 14:10, 20 April 2009 (EDT) @Andyroid: The only thing which might not work out of the box would be, I think, some wireless chips, like the rt2860sta. But these are available in AUR, so stock kernel should work. I agree it should be moved as first option since it is the simpler option. Building a custom kernel would be useful to include all modules in-kernel to speedup boot, which is not the priority when installing.

What about the 1000/1000H?

In all the article only the 901 model is commented. In my opinion, as all the things also apply to the 1000/1000H models (I guess) it should be corrected, for example, writing 901/1000/1000H where 901 is.

--Chori 16:08, 9 October 2008 (EDT) There are some subtle differences in the hardware between the 901 and 1000 models. If someone wants to take on highlighting the 1000(H) specific idiosyncrasies, I'd be happy to expand the scope of this wiki page.

Afaik just the bigger display is the difference but I have a 1000H so if you tell me what you think should be different, I'll check it. I could follow this articel without any problems with my 1000H. --Rorschach

The hardware differences might be more subtle than just the screen size. I just got a 1000 (not H nor HA) and started a new thread on the forum for this: We could also merge the 4 pages on EeePCs into one big, or one generic and smaller ones for specific details on each models. What do you think? --big_gie

I have created a new wiki entry for the 1000: Asus_Eee_PC_1000. I also created a package for ACPI events which should supports all the different models. You can find acpi-eeepc-generic in AUR. Can anybody test this for me on other models then the 1000? Thank you! :) --big_gie 12:30, 21 January 2009 (EDT)

Different kernels

Any chance of a summary of the kernels available from: eg the git ones?

And why does searching the wiki for 901 result in zero page title matches and zero page text matches?!?