Linux-Hardware Digest #346, Volume #10 Thu, 27 May 99 22:13:38 EDT
Contents:
Re: Setting up the X server: Problem with the my sreen! (David C.)
Re: Linux on desktop Dells (Donovan Rebbechi)
memory, redhat 5.1 ("fasoulas vassilis")
YAMAHA OPL3SAx - Device or resource busy ("Johan de Ridder")
Re: TEKRAM SCSI adaptators and 2.2.x kernels (Uwe Naumann)
Re: Which modem to buy? (Andrew Comech)
Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Support for the G400 in June (Marc Mutz)
Re: 3DNow instructions and Linux kernel? (Marc Mutz)
Re: Mounting (Marc Mutz)
Re: memory, redhat 5.1 (Marc Mutz)
Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: choosing an OS for a retired Sun workstation (Carl Anderson)
Re: AGP versus PCI ("Tomcat")
Re: After install, RH5.2 claims "fs iso9660 not supported by kernel" ("Luiba")
Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems (Totally Lost)
Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems (Totally Lost)
Re: Modemcard under Linux/KDE ("Charles Sullivan")
Re: choosing an OS for a retired Sun workstation (W. Jeffrey Rankin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David C.)
Subject: Re: Setting up the X server: Problem with the my sreen!
Date: 27 May 1999 15:59:14 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric) writes:
>
> My problem is that I have this old 15" SVGA PS/1 screen but I don't
> have the spec. for it. And my question is how can I get the :
> + Clock frequency in mHz
> + The horizontale display end
> + The start horizontal retrace end
> + The end horizontal retrace value
> + The horizontal total value
> + The vertival display end value
> + The start vertical retrace value
> + The end vertical retrace value
> + The vertical total value.
>
> that I need to set up X.
Do you need all of these?
If you're using XFree86, the xf86Config script will do most of this.
You should simply have to specify the horizontal and vertical frequency
ranges. The script will auto-generate a large number of modelines for
standard resolutions, and the server will trim the list down to those
that your monitor is capable of displaying (based on the horizontal and
vertical frequency ranges.)
IBM should have this information on-line. Go to
http://www.pc.ibm.com/support and type the monitor's model number in the
"Quick Path" box on the left-hand side (where it says "Entery
type-model"). Follow the link to Product Information, and then click
the Technical Specifications document link.
The actual pixel values for the modelines (if you don't want to use
xf86config's values) can be calculated from the resolution and refresh
frequencies you require. Check out the XFree86-Video-Timings HOWTO file
for lots of information on this.
-- David
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Linux on desktop Dells
Date: 27 May 1999 22:02:14 GMT
On Wed, 26 May 1999 16:46:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Does Linux install on those desktop Dells with that cage for all the
>plug in cards?
Better: I believe Dell will preload RH6.0 for you.
Check out http://www.dell.com/linux
--
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Buying computer parts ? How do you know which vendors to trust ?
http://www.resellerratings.com
Impartial and accurate. Straight from the buyers mouth.
( disclaimer: i'm not affiliated with resellerratings.com )
------------------------------
From: "fasoulas vassilis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: memory, redhat 5.1
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 22:59:03 +0300
i have installed redHat linux 5.1, and KDE as window manager on a Pentium II
with 128 mb memory,
when i see the memory information i sow only 64 MB, where is the rest 64
Mbs?
I have heard that i must change a configuration file but i don' know witch
file.
Can someone help me?
Thanks
------------------------------
From: "Johan de Ridder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: YAMAHA OPL3SAx - Device or resource busy
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 22:32:13 +0200
Hi,
I can't get my soundcard working under linux
I have a siemens notebook with a YAMAHA opl3sax card
I have installed Red Hat 5.2 Linux. Kernel version 2.0.36
Window 95 is also installed on the system and there the card works fine.
I have installed the alsa driver 0.3.0 but when I try a modprobe I get the
message
init_module: Device or resource busy
Whats the solution to this problem???
Thanks in advance,
Johan de Ridder
------------------------------
From: Uwe Naumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TEKRAM SCSI adaptators and 2.2.x kernels
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 14:37:21 +0200
I'm using a tekram 390 SCSI Controller with kernel 2.2.5 and the tekram driver
works fine.
Am Wed, 26 May 1999 hat Dominique LEDUCQ geschrieben:
>Hello,
>
>I've heard that there were no more drivers for the TEKRAM SCSI adaptators in
>the 2.2.x kernels ? Is it exact ? Is it possible to use another driver safely ?
>What would you buy as an UW adaptator to use with both 2.0.35 and 2.2.x kernels
>?
>
>Dominique.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Comech)
Subject: Re: Which modem to buy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 27 May 1999 20:24:31 -0500
On Thu, 27 May 1999 08:07:30 -0400, Chris Aiken wrote:
>I have a Viking Model RFM56KEXT external. Works great on
>Windoz 95/98/NT4/MAC and Linux. Cost about $100US at
>www.compusa.com May be cheaper elswhere.
Good modems are already at $40... (the price difference buys you 64MB
of parity memory ;-)
a.
--
Looking for a Linux-compatible V.90 modem? See
http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~comech/tools/CheapBox.html#modem
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,csu.unix.linux
Subject: Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems
Date: 27 May 1999 21:21:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.hardware Totally Lost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: There are a number of applications that will benefit from
: dual Celerons. The warning, is that a number of app's will not,
: and may even perform worse. For those that are able to learn
: from other experiences, this is a valuable heads up.
A normal single-CPU home-system is about $1000. for an additional $150 you
get a potential speedup of 100% (in real life somewhere beetween
60-80% when the application takes effekt of the second CPU)
To have the same PII power that would about $700, and the speedup
maybe 70-90% - of course, always depending on the application.
10-20% more speed for 50% more money? Only if i need it!
: Did you try SpecWeb, NetBench, WebBench
: or TCP-C benchmarks which by most industry standards represent a
: "heavy load"?
Not yet. Please give me the URLs for those, and i will do them.
: An Oracle data base server under modest load has a working set of
: between 3-9MB. A Web server under moderate load has a working set
: of between 500K-6MB. An NFS/SMB fileserver under moderate load has
: a working set of 400K-2MB. In each of these applications, the difference
: between 128K and 512K L2 cache is significant, most really benefit from
: 1M L2 caches. The idiot that tries to save $150 by using Celerons,
: just degraded the systems capacity under load by 80% or more for
: loads like these.
Of course, it doesn't make sense to save 5% money and to loose 20%
speed, but i am not talking of Indistrie Computers that are
>$3K, but of home-machines that should be near $1K.
And in this price-range, i experienced a speedup of 80% at
20% more in price - for my favorite application (compiling), of course.
:> 2) if i realy had a mission critcal Server under heavy load, then i
:> would buy a _real_ Computer (i am not talking of Xeons)
: I don't know what you might think a real computer is, but a Dual Xeon
: or Katmai server with 5 channel software raid, clustered by two or
: four, can deliver the performance (and possibly the reliability)
: of almost any big iron server less than $250K a few years ago,
: at around or less than 10% the cost.
I was talking about the Brain-Dead intel-Architecture inside
and outside the CPU! (Even with a MC68000/8 you can
stand harder real-time requirements than with an PIII/500
- application depended)
PCs have an awfull and non-deterministic architecture.
It is realy the worst technology you can buy for money - but they
are realy cheap! That is the reason, why i didnt't bought
a _real_ computer, but a Dual Celeron :-)
: I used to think that the
: dual 370/165's I worked on at the bank some years back was a real
: computer ... My notebook today is faster and has more disk, but
: lacks the printer capacity of the 27 1401N2's with AN chains, and
: the input capacity of the MICR farm.
Have a look at AXP, Sparc, MIPS and maybe PowerPC-based machines.
those i would say are real computers :-)
I am sure, my home-dual-celeron can't stand the load of our
old Alpha-Server 266 (1/6 the speed) when 30 people are working on it!
But for what i (and many others) am doing at home, the celerons
are the better choice!
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Bernhard Kuhn (kuhn[at]lpr.ei.tum.de) O|||OO||OO| |
| Laboratory for Process Control and Real-Time Systems O|||O|O|O|O |
| Technische Universit�t M�nchen Tel.+49-89-289-23732 O|||OO||OO| |
| 80290 M�nchen, Germany Room 3944 Fax -23555 OOO|O|||O|O |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:31:36 +0200
From: Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Support for the G400 in June
ren wrote:
>
> Here is a Linux Box I'm building.
>
> ASUS P5A AGP 512K ATX
you will not be able to turn on DMA on this board, as far as I know
(only if you install 2.3.x-kernels, but don't do that - they're
experimantal)
> AMD K62-400 3D MMX 100 MHZ
> 128MB SDRAM PC100 8ns
good!
> Western Digital 10.2 GB Ultra DMA HD
get yourself a IBM DTTA. It makes not even a sound if you access it (not
one that you can hear above the Power-supply-fan)
> Teac 1.44mb FD
> USR Akita 56K V.90
> Toshiba 4x DVD rom
> Sound Blaster Live
this is also a kicker: the driver is in an early bata stage!!
>
> Here is the kicker.
>
> I want to use the Matrox G400 card with DVD, svideo out, 32bit 2D, and
> 3D bump maping
>
> Can I get this video card to work with Linux?
bottomline: don't use the newest available hardware if you plan for
Linux unless you know of *every* single part of it that it is supported.
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:19:27 +0200
From: Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 3DNow instructions and Linux kernel?
Piers B. wrote:
>
> Will the Linux kernel be taking advantage of the 3DNow instruction set from
> AMD anytime soon?
>
> I would have thought that this and the KNI set from Intel would help in
> things like 3D modeling and games (when we start to see them appear in
> quantity for Linux).
>
> Any answers
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Thanks.
>
> Piers B.
>
> Proud Linux AMD user. Go against the flow and enjoy.
Graphics has nothing to do with th kernel, because it's the Xserver that
rules it. I don't think it's likely that the kernel will drag much use
out of 3DNow, and OpenGL is in it's very beginning as far as Linux is
concerned. But Linux is well aware of 3DNow and saves its registers
(although they are the same as for MMX), so I guess user software can
use it.
The question should be whether there will ever be a
MMX/3DNow/ISSE-*gimp*... :-)
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:34:33 +0200
From: Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mounting
Jarno Saarto wrote:
>
> How can I give permission for users to write to my already mounted
> harddisk? I'm using RH6 and kernel 2.2.7.
try
chmod a+rwx <mount-point>
mount -n -o remount,rw <mount-point>
Good luck
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 00:47:17 +0200
From: Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: memory, redhat 5.1
fasoulas vassilis wrote:
>
> i have installed redHat linux 5.1, and KDE as window manager on a Pentium II
> with 128 mb memory,
> when i see the memory information i sow only 64 MB, where is the rest 64
> Mbs?
>
> I have heard that i must change a configuration file but i don' know witch
> file.
Right. You must add a 'append' parameter to the kernel definition:
'mem=128M'.
I don't know RedHat, but it seems likely to me that you can do that with
the configuration/administration tool for RedHat - look for LILO
configuration.
Marc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.misc,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.sys.hp.misc
Subject: Re: Terabite Plus Filesystems
Date: 27 May 1999 19:22:51 -0500
Reply-To: "J.L.M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bob Hoekstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Interesting project! What you don't say is how many files you have per
>directory. This is particularly important for NT.
>
>I feel that if your data is important and you want a file server that comes
>up and stays up, you should discount NT immediately. I have heard some
>horror stories about NT with very large directories -- as a test, try
>creating 100,000 small files in a single directory and pointing Windows
>Exploder at it. You will find that you can go and have a cup of coffee and a
>cigarette while the screen updates! This sort of activity affects the
>performance of the server as a whole.
>
>While I am a fan of Linux, but I would think twice about this sort of task
>for it. This leaves (IMHO) only HPUX and Solaris from your list. My personal
>preference is for Solaris, but I don't think that's critical and I cannot
>really justify it.
>
>Furthermore, I would resist using intel-based hardware. PCs are just not
>built to the same standard as most of the "real" Unix boxes from Sun, HP,
>IBM, SGI, etc. The one exception that comes to mind would be the Sequent
>range. This brings in some new flavours of Unix (AIX, Irix, Dynix, etc), and
>pretty much any of them will do a good job, and you seem to be open to this
>- maybe you should look for a good deal on a second-hand box (ex-rentals are
>often a good buy) rather than going for intel just to save money.
>
>Lastly, consider if a 64 bit hardware/OS combination may benefit. UltraSPARC
>+ Solaris 7 is one option here, but so is DEC Unix (or whatever Compaq is
>calling it now) on an Alpha box.
>
>Jake Maizel wrote:
>
>> We are building a system that needs to handle a huge number of files
>> that are 500KB-1MB in size (1-2TB total). Our only constraint right now
>> is the desire to use intel-based hardware for the host computers for
>> cost purposes. My question really is regarding which OS would best
>> handle a filesystem of this size. We are using lots of unix and NT so
>> we don't have a bias one way but we don't have experience with any OS
>> using a filesystem this big. What we are considering for hardware are
>> HP LPr hosts connected to a AL-FC RAID system (probably HP). We would
>> want to pick either HPUX, linux, NT or Solaris x86. Any experience
>> that could be passed would be great.
>>
>> jake
>
>
>
>
>
> The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
> This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
> my employer, Merck & Co., Inc. All responsibility for the statements
> made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
> sender.
--
James
http://ssdd.conservatory.com
------------------------------
From: Carl Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.sys.sun.hardware,comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: choosing an OS for a retired Sun workstation
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 23:23:03 +0000
Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> The requirements are to be stable (of course), have PPP software, and
> run Netscape... I'd prefer to set the disk up at home, using my
> FreeBSD/i386 machines, but I'm not sure I can make it bootable by a Sun
> box.
>
> Thanks for your comments!
>
> -mi
I installed Debian 2.1 on a SUN IPX with 32mb of memory. It made the
machine quite snappy
especially comaped to its previous OS (Solaris 2.5). It is stable, and can
do ppp, However
it will not run Netscape 4.5. It always returns a bus error. Chimera and
Arena and Lynx all work though.
==================================
E-Mail: Carl Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Flying Monkeys Usually Mean Trouble.
==================================
------------------------------
From: "Tomcat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: AGP versus PCI
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 19:29:11 -0500
i am using Creative Graphics Blaster Riva TNT AGP, no problems at all.
Tomcat
------------------------------
From: "Luiba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: After install, RH5.2 claims "fs iso9660 not supported by kernel"
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 21:49:03 -0300
Hi,
I had almost the same experience (same kernel, same RH5.2). The only
diffrence was the fact that the problem started to heppen with a kernel that
was recompiled by myself. To recompile it I used a .config file that was
supposed to be the one used in the original distribution. It was not. I
found that the support for iso 9660 was set as a module and it was not being
auto loaded in boot time.
Fuzzy escreveu na mensagem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>This is joke, right?
>
>I did a standard RH5.2 install (kernel v 2.0.36) from a CD.
>Everything went smoothly, but now any attempt to mount the CD (using
>either mount /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom or mount -t iso9660 /dev/cdrom
>/mnt/cdrom) fails with the message
>
>"fs iso9660 not supported by kernel"
>
>This is unbelievable! It's the same drive that was used to install
>from!
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Ciao
>Fuzzy
>:-)
>
------------------------------
From: Totally Lost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,csu.unix.linux
Subject: Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 22:17:49 GMT
In article <7ij3co$14s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.hardware mumford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : On a semi-related note, PPro's meant for normal consumption had only
> : 256K L2 cache. PPro's meant to go in servers could have 512K or
1MB.
> : These PPro's were *much* more expensive. I think the 1MB'ers were
> : going for a couple of thousand dollars at one point... *just* the
CPU.
>
> : I know for a fact that a particular company I worked for (who shall
> : remain nameless) wanted those larger-cache PPros very much. They
> : were not satisfied with 256K.
>
> Then they had an application were 256K are not enough.
> You may have an application were 4MB are not enough.
> But you may also have an application were 32K are enough.
and you might have an application where under 1K is enough and use a
bunch of 100MHz Scenix SX-28AC100's at a $5.00 a piece. There
are a lot of small number crunching problems where $500 of
these would smoke a bunch of dual Celerons.
But that is not what this thread is about. I started it with
the statement that there are:
A) A lot of small applications where dual Celerons would rock.
and
B) A lot of slightly larger applications where dual Celerons
would suck, and PII's would win.
So far you have tried to prove B wrong by asserting A, which was
already a given and has absolutely nothing to do with the truth or
falseness of B.
>
> It's only a question of code and data locality - at least
> it only depends on _your_ application.
And the foot print and locality of reference of the host OS, that
is of course if multitasking, filesystems, networking, GUI's and
other typical services are required on the system at the same time.
The working set for these services are considerable larger than
32K, and in fact larger than 128K.
>
> Of course, i'd like to own a Dual Xeon 500 with 2MB each,
> but for the same price, i get a cluster of ten or more Dual Celeron
400.
> Depending on the application, the Cluster may be 7 times faster
> then the Xeons, but they may be only 1/7 the speed as well.
A Supermicro S2DG2 with Dual Xeon 500/2MB's is about (4159*2)+585,
or roughly $9,200 in a box with memory and a disk, and about $10K
with fast software raid. The system will handle just about any
application you could toss at it, save certain research, military and
Fortune 500 MIS applications. In most cases, another couple grand of
upgrades would solve the fit problem. CPU power roughly 2K MIPS.
10 $1,000 dual Celeron 400's are pretty skimpy systems by comparison,
the set of applications they will handle is much smaller - in fact
pretty much limited to a bunch of small foot print jobs. CPU power
roughly 8K MIPS.
At roughly the same cost, an array of 1800 $3.50 Scenix SX-28AC100's
with a dual PII 333 I/O processor handles even a smaller set of
applications limited by the dual PII/333 and the very small
working set restrictions of the Scenix array processor. Total CPU
power is roughly 181K MIPS.
Each system has significantly restricted applications then the previous.
What's the point ... apples and oranges comparisons are a waste of
time.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Totally Lost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,csu.unix.linux
Subject: Re: Dual Celeron's and SMP Performance Problems
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 23:23:15 GMT
In article <7ikd09$cfi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.hardware Totally Lost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : There are a number of applications that will benefit from
> : dual Celerons. The warning, is that a number of app's will not,
> : and may even perform worse. For those that are able to learn
> : from other experiences, this is a valuable heads up.
>
> A normal single-CPU home-system is about $1000. for an additional $150
you
> get a potential speedup of 100% (in real life somewhere beetween
> 60-80% when the application takes effekt of the second CPU)
> To have the same PII power that would about $700, and the speedup
> maybe 70-90% - of course, always depending on the application.
> 10-20% more speed for 50% more money? Only if i need it!
Ok, we'll use your numbers... $1000 system, with an additional $150
that is 15% more, not 50% more, for that you get a 10-20% speed up,
a very small part of the time (doesn't speed up editing, backups,
installs, web browsing, or most other single command activities that
we occupy our time with in front of the computer). It does however
speed up a few tasks that some people do frequently.
I suspect that if the human wait time was more carefully analyzed
across the spectrum of users, that reductions on Disk I/O or network
connectivity would have have a bigger payback. For most people,
an additional $150 spent on a faster disk subsystem would save them
a lot more time than the meger saving of a dual processor. Or in many
cases, simply selecting the next faster uniprocessor model which would
shave a little off every activity, not just multi-process ones.
> : Did you try SpecWeb, NetBench, WebBench
> : or TCP-C benchmarks which by most industry standards represent a
> : "heavy load"?
>
> Not yet. Please give me the URLs for those, and i will do them.
If you have to ask that question, I suspect you can neither afford
them or have the skills to install and run them to get meaningful
results.
> I was talking about the Brain-Dead intel-Architecture inside
> and outside the CPU! (Even with a MC68000/8 you can
> stand harder real-time requirements than with an PIII/500
> - application depended)
I'm not that fond of IA32, it's kinda haphazard. But it's far
from Brain-Dead.
I've done several Motorola hardware designs with MC68008 and MC68020
chips myself, and worked on quite a few more. There are parts of IA32
that are not pretty, but there is nothing to back up your absolute
claim here. Polling both have similar latencies, the PIII/500
is a lot faster. Interrupt latencies are a little more predicable
with the Motorola products, but in terms of absolute margins, the
faster external bus clock cycles of the PIII/500 wins hands down.
Since you made the claim, please explain yourself.
> Have a look at AXP, Sparc, MIPS and maybe PowerPC-based machines.
> those i would say are real computers :-)
I own SGI's plus both M68K and PPC Mac's, and have done system level
work on Sparc's as well. The Risc architectures on the Sparc, MIPs and
PPC is just as twisted as IA32, and a lot less open. The M68K arch
never evolved far enough to deliver any real performance by today's
standards. In the end it's not the instruction set, bus architecture,
or glue logic that really matters, it's what the end users can see and
do with a system.
>From that perspective, Intel is at least as good, if not the hands
down winner, at providing a usable computer into a wide range of
computing and non-computing professionals.
> But for what i (and many others) am doing at home, the celerons
> are the better choice!
That's every buyers choice to make for themselves ... and hopefully
an informed choice at that. Blanket recomendation of one particular
techology with a total disregard to the application is folly. Hence,
my warning that dual celerons might provide a good bang for the buck
for certain users, but *DO* not blindly accept that they are fast
for everyone, or even a reasonable cost/performance tradeoff for most
people. In general, I strongly assert they are a poor choice for most
server applications, given that for a few percent more there are better
PII/PIII/Xeon uni/multi-processor options that can handle modest/large
loads *MUCH* better for the buck.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: "Charles Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Modemcard under Linux/KDE
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 20:48:19 -0400
Brian Wallace wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 20 May 1999, Florian Thiel wrote:
>> I'm new at linux. Its very good, but I've problem with my modem card.
It's
>> an ISA-Card under Win98 at COM2:. Only Linux want detect it.
>>
>It's likely a Plug and Play (PnP). Most current versions of Linux have
>isapnp to take care of this. Try typing
>pnpdump >isapnp.conf
>Then edit isapnp.conf to setup your modem card, put it in /etc
>and add
>/sbin/isapnp /etc/isapnp.conf
>in one of the startup files (/etc/rc.d/rc.S right after swapon line).
>That's what I do with Slackware it may be a little different for you.
It's possible this is a Winmodem, which is useless in Linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W. Jeffrey Rankin)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.sys.sun.hardware,comp.unix.solaris,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: choosing an OS for a retired Sun workstation
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 18:14:48 -0500
Peter -
A somewhat related question, I was just looking for Netscape for my SS2
running RedHat Linux 5.2, but I can only find "x86" versions. Will that
run on my machine, or should I download a different version?
Thanx -
Jeff
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mikhail Teterin wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > A friend of mine received a working, but too old and slow (by todays
> > standards) Sun workstation for free. The disk is dead, but we have a 1Gb
> > replacement. The machine has 16Mb of RAM, is by itself diskless -- fits
> > entirely in what a casual observer would call monitor. I do not know the
> > model :(, but can get it if needed. The disk we have is external. There
> > is also an external CD-ROM available. No floppy drives in sight,
> > though... The RAM can be increased. A tape drive is a painful option.
> >
>
> Sound like a Sun Sparcstation ELC or SLC. Recommendable:
>
> - RedHat Linux 5.2 Sparc
> - or older Solaris Relase (2.5.1)
>
> Netscape is avail. for both OS at ftp.netscape.com
>
> Solaris 7.0 is available for educational purposes at media costs @ SUN. In
> my opinion too oversized for a 16 mg machine (installs at min. 32 megs ?)
>
> I would take RedHat Linux into closer consideration. I am using it on my Sun
> Sparcstation 2 and my ELC. Runs fine, but 32 megs are recommenable,
> espacially if you want to run Netscape which is a real memhog
>
> Bye
> Peter
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
