[PLUG] eee pc 900 original disks?

[Denis Heidtmann]

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:15 AM, chris (fool) mccraw <gently at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:02, Denis Heidtmann
> <denis.heidtmann at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I seem to have an eee pc 900 that has gotten into a snit.  Does anybody
> here
> > have the original disks I could borrow?  This was originally an XP
> machine,
> > but a previous owner installed Ubuntu 9.04.  It is now only partially
> > functional.
>
> if you're going to get rid of the existing install anyway, why not
> install the current ubuntu, which you can download yourself?  you have
> a choice of 'netbook remix' which is what you may want if you were the
> person who just wanted to use it to surf and edit documents--it's
> simple and stripped down.  however, i run full/regular ubuntu on my
> netbook and it works fine...but my netbook is also a little more
> capable than yours, too (10"  1366 x 768 screen, 320G hard drive, 2G
> ram).
>
> unless you want to install xp, i'd stay away from the original disks
> entirely--any linux should boot just fine on the thing, netbook-aware
> or not.
>
>
>
> > Alternatively, I could install some Linux which is tailored for the SSD
> > which this machine has.
>
> current ubuntu should boot blazingly fast from that disk.  probably in
> under 10 seconds.  they severely optimized the boot process in 10.4
> (april) and i would suspect it is at least as good in the latest 10.10
> release.  i'm not sure in what other way (that would be meaningful on
> such an otherwise underpowered machine) someone would "optimize" for
> the ssd.  even a complete ubuntu install shouldn't take even 16GB, and
> you don't sound to need a complete install (developer tools, games,
> etc)


My understanding is tailoring for SSD takes into account that there is a
limit on the number of writes the drive can handle.  I would expect that
involves choices in the kernel.  Speed is not the issue. If the netbook
remix does that, I will choose it.


> I would prefer Ubuntu, since that is what I
> > am accustomed to.  I also need to update the BIOS, but I do not want to
> > chance messing that up, so I want to get the machine in a stable state
> > first.
>
> one usually updates the bios independently of the linux install, with
> a usb stick containing freedos or similar.  or anyway, this one does
> =)


I realize the BIOS is independent of the OS, but the manuals describe
getting to the start of the BIOS upgrade through the OS.  How do I do it
with a broken OS?  I have the new BIOS file.  Is just adding it to a
bootable thumb drive all that is needed?

Thanks,
-Denis