I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't even use my eth0. Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I need to get some. Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS?? -- Beartooth Staffwright, PhD, Neo-Redneck Linux Convert Remember I know precious little of what I am talking about.
Beartooth wrote:> > I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on > which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't > even use my eth0. > > Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine > with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed > for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I > need to get some. > > Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I > need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS??Why do you want CentOS on an EeePC ? It's not really intended for that purpose, if your having to ask where to get the drivers for it your probably not suited for running CentOS on the EeePC. Your better off with Fedora, or Ubuntu or something that has broader hardware support. I installed Ubuntu 9.04 netbook remix on my EeePC 2G surf yesterday(onto a 4G SD card), it was pretty painless although the general UI has too much eye candy, so it is choppy. The wiki says future kernel updates should address some of the sluggishness. nate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Beartooth wrote:> I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on > which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't > even use my eth0. > > Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine > with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed > for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I > need to get some. > > Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I > need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS?? >I'm sure it's possible, but unless you plan not to use X, you won't have that much space left to work with! And CentOS needs a bit of RAM to perform well anyway. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkn2Ev0ACgkQe0Ain3PYkIbKOgCfeBdeAvUcPbmeLvro8buCZ2ku TxAAn0UNBP31jYEb/c+tXf7GB0CwTgNz =7XQx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Beartooth <Beartooth at comcast.net> wrote:> > ? ? ? ?I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on > which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't > even use my eth0. > > ? Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I > need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS??Run /sbin/lspci and find the hardware info for your wired / wireless device. Then search the CentOS wiki. For example, if you see "AR5007EG", there is a wiki page for that: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/WirelessAR5007EG If you also see "Atheros", there is a good chance that you can find the latest driver that is available as the kernel module at the ElRepo repository ( http://elrepo.org ). For example, if your device requires the atl2 driver, you can install it by (after installing the repo): yum --enablerepo=elrepo install kmod-atl2 Hope this helps, Akemi
Beartooth wrote:> I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on > which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't > even use my eth0. > > Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine > with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed > for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I > need to get some. > > Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I > need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS??I have the EXACT same hardware, but am running FC10 on mine. Works just great. And I have both suspend and hibernate working. Ethernet and WiFi work with NetworkManager with no problems, so far. As nice it is to stay with Centos across the board, I am moving more into using FC for notebooks. However, I am still reluctant to make the move on a notebook that is my 'workhorse'; I need more stablity for something I count on for my job. FC is for tools.
Beartooth wrote:> On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:24:57 -0700, nate wrote: > > >> Beartooth wrote: >> >>> I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on >>> which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't >>> even use my eth0. >>> >>> Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did >>> fine >>> with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed >>> for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I >>> need to get some. >>> >>> Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I >>> need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS?? >>> >> Why do you want CentOS on an EeePC ? It's not really intended for that >> purpose, if your having to ask where to get the drivers for it your >> probably not suited for running CentOS on the EeePC. Your better off >> with Fedora, or Ubuntu or something that has broader hardware support. >> > > I have a strong if perhaps irrational preference for the .rpm > family; I have indeed installed and run F8, F9, F10, and Eeedora on this > machine. Unfortunately, until I can afford to replace it with a somewhat > larger netbook, what's left of my eyeballs and fingers limits me to using > it in waiting rooms, and not much of anywhere else. > > Given that limitation, speed of boot becomes a major criterion. > F10 (and also, believe it or not, Pupeee) took *over* ten minutes -- yes, > real sixty-second minutes; it's not a typo -- just to boot. And then had > to find wifi. >WHAT!!!!!!??????? I just booted mine for the morning, and it was on the login GUI in 50 SECONDS! Once I entered my password it was connected to the network in under 30 SECONDS (and I use WPA-PSK). You have install/setup problems. What services are you running? There may be a number of services that are waiting on the network to come up to check something and are waiting for timeouts, missing that the link is down so don't bother to try (ntp does it right, for example).> > >> I installed Ubuntu 9.04 netbook remix on my EeePC 2G surf yesterday(onto >> a 4G SD card), it was pretty painless although the general UI has too >> much eye candy, so it is choppy. The wiki says future kernel updates >> should address some of the sluggishness. >> > > I've also been trying plain Ubuntu, Eeebuntu, Crunchbang, > DreamLinux, and a couple more. > > I'll run an OS of that ilk if I have to. > > But for fifty-odd years, the Baby Boomers have trodden my heels, > doing all I do a few years later. Some of them, even more than I, will be > wanting a mature RedHat-type OS, well back from the bleeding edge, to > enable them to check their email, etc., rather than thumb antediluvian > magazines in waiting rooms. >I am 58, approaching 59. Sat down in front of my first TeleType (running at 55 Baud) in '66; BASIC was 2 years old. I like stablity, but after a number of years on Centos, and the evolving rate of hardware, I have bit the bullet this year and added both FC9 and FC10 to my platform mix. Of course the first driver was to get the 2.6.27 kernel to get IPsec BEET mode.> What's more, CentOS will be able to oblige them, once it gets up > to something like present Fedora kernels. Why not a little sooner? >That is Redhat's call when they put it into RHEL, ask them.> And just in case, do please tell me where to get this ultra- > exemplary netbook remix, which I have somehow failed to encounter. (I > think all my Ubuntoid OSs so far are 8-based.) >
Beartooth wrote:> On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:32:00 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote: > > >> Robert Moskowitz wrote: >> >>> >>>> Given that limitation, speed of boot becomes a major criterion. >>>> F10 (and also, believe it or not, Pupeee) took *over* ten minutes -- >>>> yes, real sixty-second minutes; it's not a typo -- just to boot. And >>>> then had to find wifi. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> WHAT!!!!!!??????? >>> >>> I just booted mine for the morning, and it was on the login GUI in 50 >>> SECONDS! >>> >>> Once I entered my password it was connected to the network in under 30 >>> SECONDS (and I use WPA-PSK). >>> >>> You have install/setup problems. What services are you running? There >>> may be a number of services that are waiting on the network to come up >>> to check something and are waiting for timeouts, missing that the link >>> is down so don't bother to try (ntp does it right, for example). >>> >> Now that you mention it, it does sound like sendmail/samba, etc., >> waiting for DNS on a disconnected network. >> > > Gentlemen, I thank you both -- and wish I had gotten to this > point several weeks back. I'll go give F10 (or maybe F11) another try > ASAP. Are you running full F10, or the install from the live CD, or what? >F10 from install CD then over net where I have the install repo locally. IE full install. Had to use a USB CD drive and change bios to boot from it. No biggy.> Incidentally, it was only about last week that I discovered I > could upgrade both the RAM (to the 2 GB it has now) and the SD card (from > the 4 GB I had to the 8 GB now). That has of course made everything since > seem better. >Oh, how do you unsoldier the drive? My understanding is this unit has the drive hard wired........ I have /root and /home on the 8Gb SD card and /boot, /var, and a 2Gb swap on the 4Gb SSD.
Beartooth wrote:> I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on > which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't > even use my eth0. > > Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine > with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed > for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I > need to get some. > > Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I > need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS?? >I wrote a page on the Wiki regarding CentOS 5.2 on the Eee PC (was a 900 model though) : http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Asus/Eeepc But i admit also that i've not yet updated the page for 5.3 (and neither created a modified initrd.img to include the atl2 kernel module) .. I've updated my 5.2 Eee PC to 5.3 and everything was still working as expected ... it even removed the (previously needed) uvcvideo kernel module, now included in the base kernel. On the other hand, I also admit that i was tempted by F10 on the same machine to compare boot performance and we have to admit also that the 2.6.18-*.el5 kernel was surely not designed to be used on netbook : F10 boots faster and of course has by default everything needed (atl2, madwifi for the Atheros wifi card, newer alsa module for the sound card, better acpi support, etc ...) So running CentOS on the Eee PC is doable and everything is working (wired/wifi/webcam/suspend/hibernate) but real slow in comparison with F10 .. :/ -- -- Fabian Arrotin idea=`grep -i clue /dev/brain` test -z "$idea" && echo "sorry, init 6 in progress" || sh ./answer.sh
Warren Young wrote:> Beartooth wrote: > >>> Why do you want CentOS on an EeePC ? >>> >> I have a strong if perhaps irrational preference for the .rpm >> family >> > > Me, too, and it's rational in my case. I've experienced the whole range > of both sets of tools, from the ground up. RPMs are simpler to build > than DEBs, and an rpm/yum-based system is easier to maintain than a > dpkg/apt-based one, considering just packaging issues. It's true that I > have many more years experience with RPM based systems, but I've been > using Ubuntu now for about a year and a half, and my opinion isn't > shifting much any more. > > I think much of the hype about how great the Debian packaging system is > came from the days before they adopted yum, so Debian fans could point > to apt-get and say "Isn't it great to be able to install packages from > the net directly from the command line?" Sure, once upon a time it was, > but today, the main distinction I draw between the two sets of tools is > that the Debian tools are more complex with no compensating benefit. > (There are even some things the simpler Red Hattish tools can do that > the Debian ones can't, easily. rpm -qa, for one.) > > But, enough of the advocacy rant. Though I use CentOS far more often > than I do Ubuntu, there are a few places where Ubuntu simply works > better. One of those places is on my Eee 1000. Take it from an RPM > fan: it's a poor reason to prefer CentOS for your netbook, unless your > goal is to feed patches back to Red Hat for future versions of the OS. > > >> speed of boot becomes a major criterion. >> > > Ubuntu 9.04 greatly improved the boot speed relative to previous > versions of the OS. > > Separate from that effort, but speeding disk-heavy activities like > booting still further, Ubuntu 9.04 also includes ext4 support. You have > to partition manually to enable it, but I recommend that for netbooks > anyway because that's also the only way to avoid having a swap > partition. Swapping to flash is loony. >Maybe, maybe not. First my system is only 1Gb. Kind of on the 'thin' side, but this is a Netbook! But more importantly is Hibernate to swap. I use this regularly. Suspend eats up your battery.> Between these improvements and a few tweaks to the automatic service > startup list, my 1000 goes from the BIOS screen to a desktop in under a > minute. I'm running the netbook remix version. > > Ubuntu 9.04 supports the Eee's power management features, too, so you > can sleep it and wake it back up reasonably quickly. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >
Michael A. Peters wrote:> nate wrote: > >> Beartooth wrote: >> >>> I have an ASUS EeePC 701 (with 2GB of RAM and an 8 GB card), on >>> which I've installed CentOS on the hard-drive-plus-card. But it can't >>> even use my eth0. >>> >>> Some one on a local LUG, where I had mentioned that other OSs did fine >>> with all the same exact hardware, suggested that CentOS, being designed >>> for stability rather than the bleeding edge, likely lacks drivers; so I >>> need to get some. >>> >>> Anybody know what drivers (for wireless as well as ethernet cable) I >>> need, and how/where to get ones to fit CentOS?? >>> >> Why do you want CentOS on an EeePC ? It's not really intended for >> that purpose, if your having to ask where to get the drivers for it >> your probably not suited for running CentOS on the EeePC. Your better >> off with Fedora, or Ubuntu or something that has broader hardware >> support. >> > > I don't have an EeePC but I like to run the same distro on everything. > So since my remote server, lan server, desktop, and laptop run CentOS - > that's what I would want on an EeePC as well. > > With respect to the nic, my suspicion is that you may just need either > the Fedora kernel or a patch from the Fedora kernel. > > With CentOS 5.0 - the onboard gigabit nic on my Asus board worked OOB in > Fedora 8 or 9 (forget which) but did not work in CentOS - though CentOS > did see it and tried to use forcedepth (I think that was it), which > worked in Fedora but not well CentOS. So I just use a PCI card (though I > suspect onboard would work now, why change it?) > > Can't do that with an EeePC - but you probably could rebuild the Fedora > kernel for the EeePC. >Everything I have seen on this list is DON'T replace the kernel in Centos. Add to it, but DON'T replace it. Unless you are one of the Centos developers, I guess.> I wonder if a working driver for the EeePC nic is something that could > be patched into the CentOS plus kernel ?? > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >
Hmmm?"This will wipe your drive." normally means what it says it wipes your drive to be honest if it was me then I would skip centos and go for the uhuntu, it's designed for the netbook and from what I hear i runs like the clappers on the netbook. Regards? Per Qvindesland --- Original message follows --- SUBJECT:?Re: [CentOS] 5.3 on an EeePC?? FROM: ?Beartooth TO:?"centos at centos.org" DATE:?03-05-2009 21:02 On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:20:30 -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote: [...]> I like CentOS better than Debian also but, apparently, the newUbuntu> 9.04 works really well on netbooks. > > It's here: http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download-netbookFor the record, I went there, got that, burned it to a medium, and started an install. It came up with some startlingly strong caveat, to the effect that "This will wipe your drive." I took that to be so much more ubuntoid protecting me from myself, and went ahead, taking for granted that the installer would give me at least one choice which would preserve CentOS. Ba-aa-aadd move. It meant what it said : never gave me any other choice of anything, but went ahead and, sure enough, completely trashed my CentOS install. After that, the machine ran UNR and only UNR, even with thumbsticks in it. I finally ended up running DBAN against it -- and am still looking for other, *NON*-ubuntoid distros ... -- Beartooth Staffwright, PhD, Neo-Redneck Linux Convert Remember I know precious little of what I am talking about. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090503/94d30e6d/attachment-0004.html>