Linux-Hardware Digest #256, Volume #9 Sun, 24 Jan 99 05:13:36 EST
Contents:
Re: Fastrack [raid?] controller & related Q's (Yan Seiner)
Re: Newbie Question ("J�rgen Exner")
Pausing from the linguistic pecker-measuring for a moment ... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Diamond Stealth II S220 Help! (don't want to give up this easily) ("Joe Seefeldt")
Re: SCSI Parity Errors (Nicholas Barry)
Re: idt winchip? (Christopher B. Browne)
Re: emachine 300c Cyrix - Any Red Hat 5.2 Success? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Ultra ATA/UDMA drives+controllers don't work? (Ray)
ipfwadm and multiple registered IP's ("Brian D. Cook")
Re: Need someone help!!! (Peter S. Frouman)
Re: Shutting Down (gus)
Re: IRQ conflicts (Hugh McCurdy)
Matrox Millenium G200 AGP ("Myst")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yan Seiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Fastrack [raid?] controller & related Q's
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 12:44:13 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fasttrak is proprietary. Promise has no plans to support linux, is
unwilling to disclose the API, and will not even release (officially)
the ports and IRQs the board uses (although this is available via the
Win32 driver).
I've found 2 IDE raid companies: SVEC which makes a high end OS
independent RAID 5 box at $1800, and Arco IDE which makes an OS
independent RAID 1 controller for about $200-$250. My Arco controller is
on the way to replace my Promise Fastrak controller. You can contact
arco at www.arcoide.com .
Yan
Tom Emerson wrote:
>
> This is more of a hardware query, but I'm also interested in the software
> side as well, so to both groups this question goes:
>
> [background] I'm working on a project involving Non-Linear Editing (NLE) of
> video tapes, as such I'm looking into newsgroups related to that topic and
> I find LOTS of praise for the PROMISE "FASTRACK" PCI udma controller. This
> looks like it does some raid0 ? 1 functions [multiple/striped disks, disk
> mirroring] [re: see various threads in REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP]
>
> [the question(s)]
>
> 1) WHO has successfully used the FASTRACK in a linux environment and are
> you willing to share your experiences? [BTW: I hate the "open ended"
> version of this question "has ANYONE ...", of course, SOMEONE probably HAS
> had success, they just aren't reading this newsgroup ;) ]
>
> 1b) Although nobody has mentioned it on the other newsgroup(s), another
> controller I've seen is the Adaptec 333 [I think] which is SPECIFICALLY
> raid-oriented [and may even require a special MB], again, anyone willing to
> share success/horror stories of getting it to work with Linux?
>
> 1c) [not that I'm expecting much of an answer at this point...] I've
> also seen another raid-specific SCSI controller at Fry's, but cannot think
> of the name of it offhand...
>
> 2) I know there are various implementation levels of RAID [0,1,3, ? 5
> being the most popular], even talked about them in school, but "it's been
> awhile" and my mind is getting foggy on the details :) Specifically, for
> raid-STRIPING, which is better/easier: IDE or SCSI? I suspect the FASTRACK
> will stripe to one device on each IDE interface first, then both devices on
> each device for a total of four devices in the "stripe set"; when dealing
> with SCSI, there is only one interface/cable, although each device can
> more-or-less run independantly of the processor, so does this affect the
> overall capability of the system?
------------------------------
From: "J�rgen Exner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Newbie Question
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:03:41 -0800
Charles Riley wrote in message <788qv6$fc8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Is there any way to access a Zip Drive from Linux? ....
Trivial, just mount the filesystem on the Zip the same way as you do for a
file system on any other HD. This works at least for SCSI ZIPs.
For other interfaces you may need additional drivers.
BTW: You read the ZIP-drive and ZIP-Install MiniHowtos, didn't you?
jue
--
J�rgen Exner; microsoft.com, UID: jurgenex
Sorry for this anti-spam inconvenience
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 01:13:31 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.misc,comp.emacs,comp.editors
Subject: Pausing from the linguistic pecker-measuring for a moment ...
Well, if y'all are willing to stoop to listen to a lowly ed-using knuckle
dragger, you should take a look at the old NorthGate OmniKey keyboards at
www.cvtinc.com (back in production) or the old Lexmark (i.e., Selectric)
keyboards still in production at www.pckeyboard.com. I prefer the Selectrics
myself, but many people swear by the Northgate units. I like the fact that I
can beat someone to death with my keyboard and resume typing, but hey, what do
you expect from an ed user, right? And I remain convinced that a good key feel
prevents RSI, based on the fact that there are lots of old secretaries who still
type 90+ wpm and only started having problems when they were given Dells or some
similar POS with a really crappy keyboard, so a good keyboard (as was pointed
out before this thread got silly) is an investment in your health.
I don't dislike Emacs, but some of the users ... geeeez ...
Brendan Todd Corkery
btc1@bga dot com
UNIX: Functionality is its own sufficient beauty.
Erik Naggum wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
> | Actually dear sir, I do understand it.
>
> I'm going to love this.
>
> | My particular field is communications, which is what this is all about.
>
> no, you just _restricted_ it to communications. but let's pretend.
>
> | And as with a better mouse trap, if you find a better way to communicate
> | people will rush to your door step to adopt it.
>
> when was the last time you actually saw that happen? and when was the
> last time you saw how people _fight_ new ideas that de-stabilize their
> own carreers and change the way they have to do business?
>
> if your field is communications, why don't you see that whether you have
> a better or worse mouse trap doesn't matter as long as your _marketing_
> is better? but I digress.
>
> | On the other hand if you remove all redundant information on the false
> | hope that it improves communications, you have missed one of the most
> | important aspects of communications theory and practice. And you have
> | defeated your purpose. It will make your communications less effective.
>
> as I said, if you can't attack what I do, invent something else and by
> all means extrapolate without understanding anything about the purpose or
> direction. "from one data point, you can extrapolate in any direction."
>
> Floyd, I have never given you grounds to believe that I have ever had any
> intention of ever removing _all_ redundant information. where did you
> get the idea that I was? _you_ invented it, didn't you? and since you
> can hardly attack me for not obeying the information-destructive process
> of destroying the case of words, you have to make it into something you
> _can_ attack. but this is foolish, and if your field is communications,
> you have just failed miserably, because you have _introduced_ something
> into the communication of others. some would call that intellectually
> dishonest, especially from someone whose field is communications and who
> should know better.
>
> | If what you are doing was actually better it would probably result very
> | quickly in a great number of people doing it on a regular basis.
>
> and would you not criticize every one of them, no matter how many?
>
> | You are not the first one to use it, and won't be the last either. There
> | is, however, a very good reason that it hasn't been widely adopted: [it]
> | sucks.
>
> *laugh* yup, that's the reason, and we know how badly stuff that sucks
> go in the market, don't we? MS Windows sucks, and sells more than
> anything that doesn't suck. K-Mart sells inferior stuff still, don't
> they? looks like I have a winner, Floyd. all I gotta do now is beef up
> the marketing.
>
> | Calling people moralistic morons because they point out the flaws in your
> | posted ideas is perhaps just a demonstration that such insults are
> | usually a reflection of the originator.
>
> this is truly fascinating. your particular field is communications and
> you suggest better ways to communicate ideas, yet you can't even _read_?
>
> if they had pointed out the flaws in my posted ideas, that'd been OK.
> what the moralistic morons do is point out flaws in their very own
> projections and extrapolations of what they no longer even _see_ as my
> flaw: they see _only_ their own projections and extrapolations. just
> like you did above, "if you remove _all_ redundant information" [my
> emphasis]. and your argument is based on my wanting to remove _all_
> redundant information, isn't it?
>
> now, I'm truly intrigued by the fact that if you do some small little
> thing, people don't see it, they see this HUGE THREAT against established
> order, and are not at all satisfied to limit their responses to what's at
> hand, but invent something else that's _worth_ being afraid of. yet,
> they are so morally outraged that anyone could favor these things that
> they have invented (and nobody actually favors, of course), that they
> don't even see _what_ is being called "moralistic morons". they see
> their projections and extrapolations and _righteous_, and when their
> _righteous_ errors of logic are exposed, they do it yet _again_: they
> defend themselves as if they were criticized for what _they_ haven't
> done, which would have been to criticize the fact at hand.
>
> I find this interminably fascinating. if communications is a field that
> contains people who do this, I wonder where I can find people who _don't_
> extrapolate in every direction from a single data point, who _don't_ read
> _into_ people's communicated ideas something that they can object to
> becaus what's actually there is completely innocuous and defensible.
>
> | Rather than call people names because they disagree with you,
>
> and this _really_ takes the cake! *applause* god, I love this!
>
> it's not because they disagree with me, you moron, it's because they
> don't even bother to see that what they disagree with is their very own
> projections and extrapolations of what I say and do. I can't be held
> responsible for what people _want_ to see. that's their problem.
>
> if you see a girl with really short hair and you cry out "you lesbians
> are immoral!", I think "moralistic moron" is entirely appropriate because
> what happened is that _you_ imputed something to what you saw that you
> had no reason even to believe is there: it could have been chemotherapy.
> if you found out, you'd be _immensely_ guilty of harrassing somebody so
> unfairly, and you'd never do it again. but if you don't take the time to
> find out that it was indeed chemotherapy and her hair had just started to
> grow back and you had _really_ hurt her, would you still go around and
> tell others that she got nasty to you _because_ she was an immoral
> lesbian? you do the math and the communications, Floyd.
>
> | why not try posting cognitive well written articles that communicate your
> | thoughts clearly.
>
> I do, but it doesn't help against people like you, who accuse me of
> things I don't do, who accuse me of calling people names because they
> disagree with me, which I never, _ever_ do, and who can't read anything
> they don't already agree to. disagreement it good. moralistic morons
> who don't think so and who accuse people of things they haven't done has
> _nothing_ to do with disagreement.
>
> | That would demonstrate the value of your formatting better than anything
> | else.
>
> yeah. I expect you to stop capitalizing your sentence-initial words, now.
>
> | But in fact, the best way to communicate concepts via written language is
> | to include redundant clues indicating separations between thought
> | structures. Punctuation and Capitalization, for example.
>
> would that _seriously_ have helped you understand what I wrote? would
> you not have reacted _exactly_ the same way: projecting and extrapolating
> in the exact same fashion? or are you trying to tell me that because I
> didn't capitalize the sentence-initial, you somehow managed to lose track
> of the _entire_ meaning of my article?
>
> I find it immensely interesting to watch people destroy information in
> the grand scale after I have pointed out to them that capitalizing the
> sentence-initial word destroys information in the small scale. I do
> wonder what possesses people to do that. perhaps they really _are_ into
> destroying information and when capitalizing words doesn't do it, they go
> for all-out assault and battery on the meaning and context of what people
> write. or something like that. it's ever more interesting to watch.
>
> #:Erik
> --
> SIGTHTBABW: a signal sent from Unix to its programmers at random
> intervals to make them remember that There Has To Be A Better Way.
------------------------------
From: "Joe Seefeldt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Diamond Stealth II S220 Help! (don't want to give up this easily)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1999 23:13:23 -0800
I've just installed Red Hat 5.1, and it appears that the Rendition Verite
2100 chipset that my Diamond display adapter uses is not supported by this
version of Linux. I've been searching web sites for drivers to no avail.
Can anybody tell me where I can get the driver for this card?
When I get it, how do I install it?
Thanks,
Joe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nicholas Barry)
Subject: Re: SCSI Parity Errors
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 07:30:36 GMT
Mark Vandersteen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I had a similar problem with a adaptec 1542b, and a seagate 540 mg HD.
: I had errors like this for a while (parity errors) before I lost the entire
: HD. It wouldn't boot the computer at all coundn't format or anything from
: floppy etc. After thinking the HD was stuffed, (I couldn't get any low level
: formatting stuff to check it myself for the 1542b). I give it to my brother
: to play with , all he did was low level format with a AHA-2940U and he's
: been using it ever since, with out problems.
: Maybe you could backup the data on the disk low level reformat it with the
: aha utilities and try again ??
Interesting idea. I formatted the drive before I got the card, and just
recompiled a transitional kernel before dropping all Future Domain support.
If I hadn't just recovered everything from F'ing up my drive (long story
involving moving the location of the /var directory) then I'd be willing
to give it a try. I just finally got it all working today. However, I
suppose that I'm more prepared now than before. Hmmm... I'll think about
it if I can't find any other suggestions first.
nick
--
n i p at i s o l a t i o n dot n e t
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car
keys to teenage boys." -P.J. O'Rourke
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Subject: Re: idt winchip?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 07:34:11 GMT
On 24 Jan 1999 06:30:53 GMT, Jason Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>i was wondering, in general, what linux thinks of the idt winchip? are
>there any compatability issues?
We had an NTLug person who reported success with it a few months ago.
The main thing I'd watch for is the consideration that since the chip
is relatively cheap, vendors may figure that you'll be willing to live
with shoddy hardware throughout your system, and try to cut excessive
corners.
--
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to Linux today?..."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: emachine 300c Cyrix - Any Red Hat 5.2 Success?
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 20:07:46 GMT
Hello folks,
I brought my eMachine 300e
(http://www.e4me.com/infocentral/product_tower300c.html) a few before. One of
the most important task I want to perform on this little toy is to install
Linux RedHat 5.2.
Unlike what someone else reported in the newsgroup, I have NO PROBLEM using
the build in CD-ROM during the installation process. The installation goes
smooth until it tried to recognize my graphic card, which and probing gave me
a blank screen. I tried out picking :
- MACH 64 Chip graphic card
- ATI Rage II
manually, and they all failed. Someone mentioned that I may need to
download another graphic driver if I want to use the build in graphic card
with Redhat 5.2 . But at least I need to do something to carry on the
installation so that I can carry on the installation, and then modify the
driver once I get the Redhat up and running. Right?
Anyone successfully story of setting up the Redhat 5.2 on eMachine 300e
with the build in graphic card?
Daniel
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Ultra ATA/UDMA drives+controllers don't work?
Date: 24 Jan 1999 08:32:24 GMT
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 18:08:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My problem is that almost all of the possible machines I could buy have the
>Ultra ATA/UDMA drives and controllers on them. Ultra ATA has become the
>defacto standard (sorry, SCSI is slightly out of my price range) for cheap
>desktop machines. Does this mean that RHLinux 5.2 will not work with *any*
>machine that has a Ultra ATA/UDMA drive and controller?
No, at worst you just won't get to use the UDMA features/extra speed. The
newest Linux kernels have support for most of the popular UDMA chipsets so I
don't think you'll have a problem.
--
Ray
------------------------------
From: "Brian D. Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ipfwadm and multiple registered IP's
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 15:57:18 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_005A_01BE461F.E3894FF0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have been trying to get this to work for about a month now, and have =
finaly given up and would like some help, if at all possible.
We have multiple registered IP's, 208.93.117.[178-182]. I have a linux =
box up and running ipfwadm. I would like to assign some of the machines =
inside the firewall, these static IP's. currently the network is a =
192.168.1.[1-143] network, with the linux box being 192.168.1.1 . I =
would like to only allow access out from a few internal IP's. For =
example, I would like the internal address of 192.168.1.137 to be a real =
IP of 208.93.117.180 . But I can't seem to figure out how to masqerade =
the other internal addresses as real ones. Doing this properly, I =
think, would allow me to DNS this 208.93.117.180 machine, as a real =
internet machine, and not an masqueraded machine. The internal network =
machines are your usual batch of WinNT and assorted 95/98 machines as =
well as a (soon to be, if I can get this to work) linux mail server. I =
would like to also only allow some users to have access to the internet, =
so I would like to control the internal addresses that can have access =
to the internet. =20
Brian D. Cook
Web Space Adminsitrator
Greer Toyota-Subaru
Wappingers Falls, NY
=======_NextPart_000_005A_01BE461F.E3894FF0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 =
HTML//EN"><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 5.00.0910.1309"' name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have been trying to get this to work =
for about a=20
month now, and have finaly given up and would like some help, if at all=20
possible.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>We have multiple registered IP's,=20
208.93.117.[178-182]. I have a linux box up and running =
ipfwadm. I=20
would like to assign some of the machines inside the firewall, these =
static=20
IP's. currently the network is a 192.168.1.[1-143] network, with =
the linux=20
box being 192.168.1.1 . I would like to only allow access out from =
a few=20
internal IP's. For example, I would like the internal address of=20
192.168.1.137 to be a real IP of 208.93.117.180 . But I can't seem to =
figure out=20
how to masqerade the other internal addresses as real ones. Doing =
this=20
properly, I think, would allow me to DNS this 208.93.117.180 machine, as =
a real=20
internet machine, and not an masqueraded machine. The internal =
network=20
machines are your usual batch of WinNT and assorted 95/98 machines as =
well as a=20
(soon to be, if I can get this to work) linux mail server. I would =
like to=20
also only allow some users to have access to the internet, so I would =
like to=20
control the internal addresses that can have access to the =
internet. =20
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A =
href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Brian D.=20
Cook</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Web Space Adminsitrator</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A =
href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Greer=20
Toyota-Subaru</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wappingers Falls,=20
NY</FONT></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_005A_01BE461F.E3894FF0==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter S. Frouman)
Subject: Re: Need someone help!!!
Date: 22 Jan 1999 20:22:08 GMT
On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 00:29:44 +0800, BBQ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dear all,
>
>While I try to mount my IDE CD-ROM with
>"mount /dev/cdrom -t iso9660 /cdrom "under Redhat5.2,
>I get an error "The kernel does not recognize /dev/cdrom as a block device
>(maybe 'insomd driver' ?"
Check that /dev/cdrom is a symlink to the correct device, for IDE this
should be something like /dev/hdb for the second drive on the first
interface, /dev/hdc for the first one on the second interface and so on.
To determine and set up the correct symlink do something like this:
'grep CDROM /var/log/dmesg' # you could also check /var/log/messages*
you should see something like this:
hdc: brand name, model, etc., ATAPI CDROM drive
once you have determined what the correct devices you can fix the symlink,
'rm -f /dev/cdrom'
'ln -s /dev/hdc /dev/cdrom'
You might also want to check that the cables are properly connected and
that the jumpers are set correctly to master or slave
>I also try"mount /mnt/cdrom " but same result...
To get this to work you need an entry like this in /etc/fstab
'/dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro,user 0 0'
The 'user' option is only necessary if you want regular users to be able
to mount/umount the cdrom.
--
-Peter Frouman | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Zippy says:
I'll show you MY telex number if you show me YOURS ...
------------------------------
From: gus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Shutting Down
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 14:23:37 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Darryl Cain wrote:
>
> G'day,
>
> Does anyone know of a way to shutdown Linux and then automatically turn off
> (use of ATX Power) as in Windows.
>
> Thanks
>
> Darryl Cain
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Have to compile "power off on shut-down" in to the kernel as part of the
APM section, I believe ...
Then, halt should work just fine.
gus
------------------------------
From: Hugh McCurdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IRQ conflicts
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 21:28:02 +0000
Allen Wong wrote:
>
> I have a minor IRQ conflict problem. Minor in that it does not seem
> to disrupt any of the systems functions but weird enough that it's
> driving me nuts. Here's the situation. On my Linux server, I have
> three non-ISA cards:
>
> 1. Matrox Millenium 4MB AGP video card
> 2. Adaptec 2940UW SCSI card
> 3. 3Com 905B-TX network card
>
> Whenever I turn on the machine, the BIOS startup message shows that I
> have an IRQ conflict between the nic and the serial port. They both are
> trying to use IRQ 9. The solution would be to move the nic to another
> PCI slot which I did. I, then, restarted the machine with the cover
> off, just in case I have to make further adjustments. The machine then
> shows that the nic is now using IRQ 11. Hurrah! I close the case and
> powered up. The nic jumped back to IRQ 9! Huh?!! Reluctantly, I
> opened up the case again and tried to rearrange the cards. Needless to
> say, I get various other IRQ conflicts such as the video card and the
> SCSI card both wanting IRQ 10 or other nonsense. I go back to the
> arrangement that gave the serial port IRQ 9 and the nic IRQ 11. Again,
> I powered up with the case opened. Serial port on IRQ 9, okay. NIC on
> IRQ 11, okay. Put the cover back on and, you guessed it, the nic jumps
> back to IRQ 9.
> I'm not making this up, honest. Does anyone have an explanation or
> a solution or will someone else, at least, admit that he's seen this
> before?
One some BIOSes you can set IRQ's to either PCI/PnP or ISA/Legacy.
My guess is that the NIC is PCI and the Serial Port is ISA.
And since you (perhaps) didn't tell the BIOS you have an ISA card using
IRQ 9, it thinks it is available and sometimes gives 9 to the NIC.
So, see if you can change your CMOS settings so that IRQ 9 is
ISA/Legacy.
Hope that solves it.
--
Hugh McCurdy
------------------------------
From: "Myst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Matrox Millenium G200 AGP
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 17:55:52 +0100
I have this videocard,i will like to know how to configure it under Xwin.
------------------------------
** 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.hardware) 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-Hardware Digest
******************************
