alps.c patch for Dell E5410?

alps.c patch for Dell E5410?

[Chris Friesen]

Hi everyone,

I've got an E5410 on which I'm trying to get the touchpad working
properly. I'm running Fedora 14 with 2.6.35 and by default it's just
recognized as a mouse.

I found a patch on the web at:
https://confluence.nau.edu/display/~cmg238@nau.edu/Recognize+ALPS+Touchpad+on+Dell+E6510+in+Ubuntu

It appears similar (but not identical) to the patch that was added for
the HP Pavilion dm3 but then backed out.

With the patch applied, the kernel appears to recognize it as a
DualPoint Stick and a DualPoint Touchpad.  On this particular machine
the stick doesn't seem to be actually wired up, but the trackpad looks
visually identical to the E6510.

However, even after it was recognized I haven't yet been able to get
scrolling to work, and "synclient -m 100" doesn't give anything
useful--but various comments have led me to wonder if it actually should
at this point.

So what's the deal here?  Is someone working on getting full support for
these things?  Should "synclient -m 100" work?

Thanks,
Chris

Re: alps.c patch for Dell E5410?

[Chase Douglas]

On 04/20/2011 04:48 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I've got an E5410 on which I'm trying to get the touchpad working
> properly. I'm running Fedora 14 with 2.6.35 and by default it's just
> recognized as a mouse.
> 
> I found a patch on the web at:
> https://confluence.nau.edu/display/~cmg238@nau.edu/Recognize+ALPS+Touchpad+on+Dell+E6510+in+Ubuntu
> 
> It appears similar (but not identical) to the patch that was added for
> the HP Pavilion dm3 but then backed out.
> 
> With the patch applied, the kernel appears to recognize it as a
> DualPoint Stick and a DualPoint Touchpad.  On this particular machine
> the stick doesn't seem to be actually wired up, but the trackpad looks
> visually identical to the E6510.
> 
> However, even after it was recognized I haven't yet been able to get
> scrolling to work, and "synclient -m 100" doesn't give anything
> useful--but various comments have led me to wonder if it actually should
> at this point.
> 
> So what's the deal here?  Is someone working on getting full support for
> these things?  Should "synclient -m 100" work?

I don't personally have much news to tell you. I don't have the
hardware, and I've been busy with other work. I won't be able to help
out here.

-- Chase