Linux-Development-Sys Digest #690, Volume #6 Sat, 8 May 99 14:14:16 EDT
Contents:
Re: Y2K bug in strptime ? (libc5) ("Robert H. de Vries")
Re: Get client machine's IP-address (Horst von Brand)
Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help (Andreas Jaeger)
Re: Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help (Paul Kimoto)
Re: Glibc rant (Greg White)
Re: Need help. My kernel won't compile on my new system. (Captain Panic)
Re: glibc-2.1 and incompatible apps (Sid Boyce)
Re: tulip driver woes (was Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?) (bryan)
tulip driver woes (was Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?) (Paul Kimoto)
Re: glibc-2.1 and incompatible apps (Juergen Heinzl)
creative webcam I - I got the specs... (Matthias Wientapper)
Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel? ("Doug Pitek")
porting Linux to other processors (Joseph Virzi)
PCI Hot Plug Support (Joseph Virzi)
Sound card driver help? ("Luke A. Guest")
Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel? (bryan)
Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel? (Richard Torkar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert H. de Vries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Y2K bug in strptime ? (libc5)
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 09:16:11 +0200
Peter Verthez wrote:
> I found the following peculiar behaviour in strptime.
> Compile and run the following program:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <time.h>
>
> int main()
> {
> struct tm tmdate;
> char* date = "01/04/2000";
>
> strptime(date, "%d/%m/%Y", &tmdate);
> printf ("The parsed year is: %d\n", tmdate.tm_year);
> return 0;
> }
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> The result will be:
>
> The parsed year is: 0.
>
> Isn't tm_year supposed to be the number of years since
> 1900 ?
Yes. The correct answer would be 100.
> At least, that is what I found in "Advanced
> Programming in the UNIX Environment", but the manpage
> of strptime only says that tm_year is a "year".
>
> Details of my system:
> - linux 2.0.26
> - libc 5.4.23
>
The new C library glibc fixes this.
I now run RedHat 6.0 with glibc 2.1.1.
Robert
--
Robert de Vries
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Horst von Brand)
Crossposted-To:
it.comp.linux.development,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.programming,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.domains,comp.unix.programmer,comp.unix.sco.programmer
Subject: Re: Get client machine's IP-address
Date: 8 May 1999 09:17:11 GMT
On Wed, 05 May 1999 16:56:17 +0200, Iond Research Srl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anybody know how can I get in a stand-alone C/C++ program, running on
>a server machine but started during a telnet/rlogin session, the IP-address
>of the client machine that launched the telnet session ?
Impossible to know, as there is nothing that points back in this case.
--
Horst von Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Casilla 9G, Vi�a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 08:07:46 GMT
Hello,
I was trying to build glibc but got undefined reference to "__printf_fphex".
I am using:
slackware 3.6 with 2.2.7 kernel,
gcc version pgcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2) release,
make 3.77,
binutils 2.9.1.0.24
Glibc was configured using CFLAGS="-mpentiumpro -march=pentiumpro"
../configure --enable-omitfp --enable-add-ons=crypt,linuxthreads
Error message I got:
make -C db2 others make[2]: Entering directory
`/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/db2' gcc -nostdlib -nostartfiles -o
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/db2/makedb -Wl,-dyn
amic-linker=/usr/local/lib/ld-linux.so.2
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/csu/crt1 .o
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/csu/crti.o `gcc --print-file-name=crtbegin.o` /u
sr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/db2/makedb.o
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/db2/libdb.s o.3
-Wl,-rpath-link=/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/m
ath:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/elf:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/nss:/usr/sr
c/g
libc-2.1.1pre2/obj/nis:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/db2:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1p
re2
/obj/rt:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/resolv:/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/linu
xth reads /usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/libc.so.6
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/libc_n onshared.a -lgcc `gcc
--print-file-name=crtend.o` /usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/c su/crtn.o
/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/libc.so.6: undefined reference to
`__printf_fphex' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: ***
[/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/obj/db2/makedb] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory
`/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2/db2' make[1]: *** [db2/others] Error 2 make[1]:
Leaving directory `/usr/src/glibc-2.1.1pre2' make: *** [all] Error 2
Please tell me, what I am doing wrong or is this wrong newsgroup?
Laurynas Biveinis
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Andreas Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help
Date: 08 May 1999 14:29:35 +0200
>>>>> lauras writes:
> Hello,
> I was trying to build glibc but got undefined reference to "__printf_fphex".
> I am using:
> slackware 3.6 with 2.2.7 kernel,
> gcc version pgcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2) release,
> make 3.77,
> binutils 2.9.1.0.24
> Glibc was configured using CFLAGS="-mpentiumpro -march=pentiumpro"
> ../configure --enable-omitfp --enable-add-ons=crypt,linuxthreads
For now try again with an empty (!) build directory and don't specify
CFLAGS or add -O2.
> Error message I got:
> [...]
> Please tell me, what I am doing wrong or is this wrong newsgroup?
See the file BUGS on how to report problems.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for pgp-key finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Subject: Re: Failed building glibc-2.1.1pre2, please help
Date: 8 May 1999 09:21:47 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <7h0rch$a2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I was trying to build glibc but got undefined reference to "__printf_fphex".
I think that I saw this too, but fixed it by running "make clean" first.
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Greg White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Glibc rant
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 05:40:34 GMT
Lou Grinzo wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lou Grinzo) writes:
> >
> > >My point is that when you're talking about a system library,
> > >a change should NEVER be the proximal cause of apps breaking.
> > >It's not a matter of whose fault it is, or who did what with
> > >the library that they weren't supposed to, etc.
> > >
> > >Does this cause cruft build up? Absolutely, and I'm as
> > >militantly anti-cruft as programmers get. But it's still
> > >better than breaking apps, because cruft costs less in
> > >the short and long run than alienating users and programmers
> > >with this sort of compatibility problem.
> >
> > This is really not a serious consideration in an open
> > source system. Everything can be recompiled. A distribution
> > upgrade was all that I required to be fully functional
> > again. If I didn't want newer versions of everything, I
> > could keep what I had. Anything that didn't work, I could
> > recompile.
>
> As long as the Linux community takes this view--problems can
> be solved by recompiling, that's the benefit of getting the
> source, etc., the mainstream user community will forever be
> a mirage on the horizon.
Umm... not to be impertinent here, but since when does Joe User even
_know_ what libc is, forget about upgrading it..? Joe User buys a
distro, plain and simple, and maybe compiles a few apps of his own... he
does not upgrade libc.
Now, I admit, the binary-release stage of things is in a lot of flux
right now, but most distro vendors are releasing packages compatible
with their distributions at a fairly quick rate, compared with
commerical release software.
I, myself, have experimented with libc6 as an upgrade/replacement to
libc5, but, IMHO, it ain't finished yet, so I won't be upgrading any
production systems, or customer's systems, until I feel that it is. BTW,
my personal benchmark is -- it's finished when Slackware adopts it as
standard in their distro. Mr. Volkerding is very careful about what goes
into Slack.
SNIP
------------------------------
From: Captain Panic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need help. My kernel won't compile on my new system.
Date: 8 May 1999 13:32:34 GMT
Thanks for the post. There is a lot here to chew on. First off I don't
think it is something wrong with my system because I compiled a kernel the
other day using RH 5.2 and egcs 1.1.1. But there may be something else I
can mess around with, maybe the swap space.
Paul Kimoto wrote:
>
> In article <7gvil3$rhr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Captain Panic wrote:
> [superfluous control-M's removed]
> > gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 4
> > make[2]: *** [sysctl.o] Error 1
>
> I know that 4 is not 11, but have you consulted the Sig11 FAQ?
>
> http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/
>
> --
> Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: Sid Boyce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: glibc-2.1 and incompatible apps
Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 07:28:42 -0400
I downloaded some stuff for RedHat 6.0 and upgraded to glibc-2.1.1. I
noticed that there was a libNoVersion.so.1 showing up when you did a ldd
on any app compile with glibc-2.0.
I installed the compat libs, these place the glibc-2.0 libs in
/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib which I added to ld.so.conf after /lib,
however the 2.0 apps fail as it looks like they attempt to use libc.so.6
and libm.so.6 for glibc-2.1.1. Even building a wrapper either to preload
these libs or using LD_LIBRARY_PATH doesn't do the job. If you place the
2.0 libs directory ahead of /lib in ld.so.conf, the reverse problem
occurs, the glibc-2.1.1 binaries fail with undefined symbols.
libNoVersion has symbols such as .......
U __curbrk@@GLIBC_2.0
U __deregister_frame_info@@GLIBC_2.0
00000780 t __do_global_ctors_aux
00000630 t __do_global_dtors_aux
U __environ@@GLIBC_2.0
U __fxstat@@GLIBC_2.0
U __gmon_start__
000007fa ? __invoke_dynamic_linker__
U __lxstat@@GLIBC_2.0
U __register_frame_info@@GLIBC_2.0
0000075c T __setjmp
U __sigsetjmp@@GLIBC_2.0
U __xstat@@GLIBC_2.0
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]# nm /lib/libc.so.6 |grep
__deregister_frame
000da2b0 T __deregister_frame
000da20c T __deregister_frame_info
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]# nm
/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/libc.so.6 |grep __deregister_frame
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]#
The usual thing seen on any glibc-2.0 binary is............
[barrabas:~]# aterm
aterm: error in loading shared libraries: aterm: undefined symbol:
__setfpucw
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]# nm /lib/libc.so.6 |grep
setfpucw
0001db4c t __setfpucw
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]# nm
/usr/i386-glibc20-linux/lib/libc.so.6 |grep setfpucw
0001b230 T __setfpucw
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]# nm /lib/libNoVersion-2.1.1.so |grep
setfpucw
[barrabas:/usr1/gcc/glibc-2.1.1]#
I would guess there is a way to get both types of binaries to run, but
I've not seen anything else specific to achieving that.
A recompile sorts out the problem of course.
If anyone knows how or can run an strace on some glibc-2.0 binaries on
a RH 6.0 installation and perhaps give pointers, I'd be greatful.
Regards
--
... Sid Boyce...Amdahl(Europe)...44-121 422 0375
Any opinions expressed above are mine and do not necessarily represent
the opinions or policies of Amdahl Corporation.
------------------------------
From: bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tulip driver woes (was Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 16:33:18 GMT
In comp.os.linux.networking Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <0EXY2.11020$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bryan wrote:
: > my tulip card is totally unreliable. I can bring it down with an ftp
: > xfer (local lan) at 10 or 100, in a minute or less. network hangs and
: > will NOT be reset by software.
: >
: > with a T1 download, it can hang the network in a few hours. this sucks ;-(
: >
: > even a '/etc/rc.d/init.d/network stop; /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start'
: > won't fix the card. only a HARD reboot will reset it.
: Have you tried newer (or older) tulip drivers
: (http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/tulip.html)?
: The de4x5 driver?
yes, I always try to have the latest installed. the one that comes
with the kernel (.89, I think) is also unsatisfactory.
--
Bryan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: tulip driver woes (was Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?)
Date: 8 May 1999 11:41:25 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <0EXY2.11020$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bryan wrote:
> my tulip card is totally unreliable. I can bring it down with an ftp
> xfer (local lan) at 10 or 100, in a minute or less. network hangs and
> will NOT be reset by software.
>
> with a T1 download, it can hang the network in a few hours. this sucks ;-(
>
> even a '/etc/rc.d/init.d/network stop; /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start'
> won't fix the card. only a HARD reboot will reset it.
Have you tried newer (or older) tulip drivers
(http://cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov/linux/drivers/tulip.html)?
The de4x5 driver?
> (btw, I now have several dec tulip cards for sale. I refuse to use
> them in 2.2 kernel boxes I have here - sigh.)
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Heinzl)
Subject: Re: glibc-2.1 and incompatible apps
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 23:04:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David T Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 4) Install all glibc2.0 apps into /glibc20/bin
>> Keep the glibc2.0 libraries in /glibc20/lib
>> Put Shell scripts in place of the binaries. For the
>> binary /usr/bin/foo, the shell script would read
>> #!/bin/sh
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/glibc20/lib:${$LD_LIBRARY_PATH}
>> /glibc20/bin/foo
>
>I doubt you've tried this one: the /lib/ld-linux.so.2 that comes
>with glibc-2.1 doesn't seem able to load libc.so.2.0.
>Well, maybe it works on Debian, but at least I couldn't get it to work on
>RedHat (which admittedly doesn't set things up as cleanly as Debian most of the
>time).
>From the 2.1.1pre2 FAQ (pre2 is correct, yes) :
...
3.18. After upgrading to glibc 2.1, I receive errors about
unresolved symbols, like `_dl_initial_searchlist' and can not
execute any binaries. What went wrong?
{AJ} This normally happens if your libc and ld (dynamic linker) are from
different releases of glibc. For example, the dynamic linker
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 comes from glibc 2.0.x, but the version of libc.so.6 is
from glibc 2.1.
The path /lib/ld-linux.so.2 is hardcoded in every glibc2 binary but
libc.so.6 is searched via /etc/ld.so.cache and in some special directories
like /lib and /usr/lib. If you run configure with another prefix than /usr
and put this prefix before /lib in /etc/ld.so.conf, your system will break.
So what can you do? Either of the following should work:
* Run `configure' with the same prefix argument you've used for glibc 2.0.x
so that the same paths are used.
* Replace /lib/ld-linux.so.2 with a link to the dynamic linker from glibc
2.1.
You can even call the dynamic linker by hand if everything fails. You've
got to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH so that the corresponding libc is found and also
need to provide an absolute path to your binary:
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=<path-where-libc.so.6-lives> \
<path-where-corresponding-dynamic-linker-lives>/ld-linux.so.2 \
<path-to-binary>/binary
For example `LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/libold /libold/ld-linux.so.2 /bin/mv ...'
might be useful in fixing a broken system (if /libold contains dynamic
linker and corresponding libc).
With that command line no path is used. To further debug problems with the
dynamic linker, use the LD_DEBUG environment variable, e.g.
`LD_DEBUG=help echo' for the help text.
If you just want to test this release, don't put the lib directory in
/etc/ld.so.conf. You can call programs directly with full paths (as above).
When compiling new programs against glibc 2.1, you've got to specify the
correct paths to the compiler (option -I with gcc) and linker (options
--dynamic-linker, -L and --rpath).
...
Cheers,
Juergen
--
\ Real name : J�rgen Heinzl \ no flames /
\ EMail Private : [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ send money instead /
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 16:12:43 +0000
From: Matthias Wientapper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: creative webcam I - I got the specs...
Hi there,
I need help in writing a driver for the creative webcam I.
After trying several months, I finally got some specs and some
windows-driver-sources.
Unfortunately I have not much knowledge about the parport-stuff
(ieee1284...).
Anybody interested in writing a driver or helping me?
Please send me an E-Mail -> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The specs/sources for the webcam I can be found at
http://www.on-line.de/~m.wientapper
Have fun,
Matthias
------------------------------
From: "Doug Pitek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 13:03:24 -0400
I've never had a problem with my 3com 10/100 PCI cards... 3c59x... about $65
each too!
bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:0EXY2.11020$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> my tulip card is totally unreliable. I can bring it down with an ftp
> xfer (local lan) at 10 or 100, in a minute or less. network hangs and
> will NOT be reset by software.
>
> with a T1 download, it can hang the network in a few hours. this sucks
;-(
>
> even a '/etc/rc.d/init.d/network stop; /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start'
> won't fix the card. only a HARD reboot will reset it.
>
> has anyone done any load testing on the 2.2 kernel and found a
> RELIABLE nic card they could recommend? one that stays up under close
> to full load on a local 10/100 lan?
>
> (btw, I now have several dec tulip cards for sale. I refuse to use
> them in 2.2 kernel boxes I have here - sigh.)
>
> --
> Bryan
------------------------------
From: Joseph Virzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: porting Linux to other processors
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 23:58:18 -0700
We have some quasi-embedded applications with StrongArm SA-110 and
another with i960. I've been toying around with the notion of porting
Linux to these processors.
I've heard that Linux has been ported to the SA-110, and I'm sure it has
been ported to the i960. Does anyone know if this is true, and where I
could get this Linux?
If not, I know this is not a trivial undertaking, but what are the
minimum hardware requirements? The designs all have:
a) flash non-volatile memory
b) lots of sdram
c) ethernet devices ( based on i82558 )
d) uart
e) optionally a mass storage device, though memory mapped through a PCI
interface
Also, I'd imagine there's the issue of a compiler for the processor.
Any pointers?
------------------------------
From: Joseph Virzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: PCI Hot Plug Support
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 00:08:54 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============12EAE479F66D2E38672D1ECA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
==============12EAE479F66D2E38672D1ECA
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 00:07:06 -0700
From: Joseph Virzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Real Time Systems, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jim Puthukattukaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PCI hot plug support
References: <7gvjkp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I share the same interests as you. Judging from what I've seen on the news groups,
many people are interested but there is no formal group working on PCI Hot Plug
within Linux.
It may be up to us to start something here, if you are interested.
FYI, my hardware designs are based around the DEC 21554 PCI Hot Pluggable Bridge.
The ultimate platform is compactPCI, though I'm currently using regular PCI.
My naive approach has been to use pcibios_write_config_dword & read_config_dword to
initialize the devices myself, according to an internal table. There is, however,
provisions for a hot plug register that are also accessible.
PLx also makes a hot swappable PCI interface chip. What are you using?
Let me know.
-Joe
Jim Puthukattukaran wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking for person(s)/group(s) that are interested in providing PCI HotPlug
> support for Linux. I am very much interested and would like with other's of like
> mind.
>
> regards,
> Jim
==============12EAE479F66D2E38672D1ECA==
------------------------------
From: "Luke A. Guest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Sound card driver help?
Date: 8 May 99 18:20:00 +0100
Hi all,
I have been asked to write a driver for a Fujitsu rebadged Eiger Labs
EPX-AA2000 PCMCIA sound card.
Has anybody here done this already? If so, could I pass you some
questions?
Thanks in advance.
--
Luke A. Guest AmigaOS/Unix/KOSH Software Designer & Programmer
http://www.nebulas.demon.co.uk
=======================================================================================
------------------------------
From: bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 17:23:42 GMT
In comp.os.linux.networking Doug Pitek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I've never had a problem with my 3com 10/100 PCI cards... 3c59x... about $65
: each too!
can you do this experiment for me, if you have the boxes for it?
set two linux 2.2 systems on a private wire (rolled cable), with the
cards of your choice. then send a fast ping stream to the other:
ping -s 1000 -f <target>
if it lives for several minutes (an hour would be nice) then I would
be willing to get a card like the one you used and try it here.
currently, my tulip cards can be frozen solid in less than 1 minute
with 2.2 kernel. again, 2.0.36 this experiment passes just fine. so
my system, wiring, etc is all fine - its the changes in the driver
and/or kernel that are at fault. and have been this way since 2.2.0.
rather than wait for the driver to stabilize, I'd like to get a card
that has a stable driver -today-, and when the tulip is back to
working again, I'll consider switching back.
: bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:0EXY2.11020$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > my tulip card is totally unreliable. I can bring it down with an ftp
: > xfer (local lan) at 10 or 100, in a minute or less. network hangs and
: > will NOT be reset by software.
: >
: > with a T1 download, it can hang the network in a few hours. this sucks
: ;-(
: >
: > even a '/etc/rc.d/init.d/network stop; /etc/rc.d/init.d/network start'
: > won't fix the card. only a HARD reboot will reset it.
: >
: > has anyone done any load testing on the 2.2 kernel and found a
: > RELIABLE nic card they could recommend? one that stays up under close
: > to full load on a local 10/100 lan?
: >
: > (btw, I now have several dec tulip cards for sale. I refuse to use
: > them in 2.2 kernel boxes I have here - sigh.)
: >
: > --
: > Bryan
--
Bryan
------------------------------
From: Richard Torkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Reliable (!) nic for 2.2 kernel?
Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 19:30:19 +0200
> : >
> : > has anyone done any load testing on the 2.2 kernel and found a
> : > RELIABLE nic card they could recommend? one that stays up under close
> : > to full load on a local 10/100 lan?
> : >
> : > (btw, I now have several dec tulip cards for sale. I refuse to use
> : > them in 2.2 kernel boxes I have here - sigh.)
> : >
> : > --
> : > Bryan
I've had a 3c509B (Etherlink III) for a year now on a 10MBit & T1. Since
kernel 2.2.0 I've used it.
It has never ever failed.
I heard that some people encountered problems regarding PnP om this card
but it is easy to disable PnP.
I've never had any problmens though.
These cards are very cheap at the moment.
Richard Torkar
--
http://milkyway.thn.htu.se/~ds98rito/
Hoping the problem magically goes away
by ignoring it is the "microsoft approach to programming"
and should never be allowed.
(Linus Torvalds)
============================================================
PGP Key ID / PGP Key Fingerprint:
D40BA0AD / C7 5D A3 B7 1A 28 7E CE E6 41 82 AE E6 EC 20 D1
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
