On Thursday 05 June 2008 17:55:23 Kirk Bocek wrote:
William L. Maltby wrote:
It's not truly any relationship like that. It's just (in the old days) a
device ID selected on the cable by jumpers on the drive. The control
is nothing more than the IDE controller selecting either 0 or 1
device
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 16:56 -0700, Kirk Bocek wrote:
Scott Silva wrote:
With PATA the device ID is based on location. Hdb is the primary slave
(slave on first port). There doesn't have to be a hda.
I thought the point of master/slave in the IDE world was that the master was
acting as
William L. Maltby wrote:
It's not truly any relationship like that. It's just (in the old days) a
device ID selected on the cable by jumpers on the drive. The control
is nothing more than the IDE controller selecting either 0 or 1
device ID for commands and data. The drive with the matching ID
on 6-4-2008 3:12 PM Kirk Bocek spake the following:
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Kirk Bocek wrote:
I didn't provide the details because it was strange that the
installation failed at the same point regardless of the booting method I
used. It felt like some basic mistake or mis-setting in the OS. But
Scott Silva wrote:
With PATA the device ID is based on location. Hdb is the primary slave
(slave on first port). There doesn't have to be a hda.
I thought the point of master/slave in the IDE world was that the master was
acting as the controller for the slave. If that's the case, how can
5 matches
Mail list logo
