"William L. Thomson Jr." wrote: > So I would ask in return, any reason why Sun/Cobalt decided to go with > eepro100 instead of e100?
General consensus amongst kernel mailing list is that e100 sucks. Further, when we started hacking on eepro100.c, e100 was not available, I believe. Please, let me know how it works, but be sure to get actual numbers! I'd like to see how our eepro100 compares to e100 on a bi-directional (1 interface) full duplex 100 MBit test. Tim -- Tim Hockin Systems Software Engineer Sun Microsystems, Cobalt Server Appliances [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ cobalt-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-developers
