Linux-Hardware Digest #438, Volume #12 Wed, 8 Mar 00 23:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Digital Cameras and Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: modems and linux... (Dances With Crows)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (Ray)
CDROM I/O error (Christopher Liu)
Re: No way to install Linux (Redhat 6.1 or Slackware 7.0) on my computer (Bruce
McKenzie)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (Keith R. Williams)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (Keith R. Williams)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (Keith R. Williams)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (Keith R. Williams)
Re: Impasse with 2 SCSI controllers, kernel mods required? (Stephen Lee - Post
replies please)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? ("Dean_Kent")
Re: modems and linux... (Jim Jerzycke)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? ("Dean_Kent")
Re: Maxtor 40G IDE w/o BIOS support (Keith Rohrer)
Re: Corel Linux and 3C905C Card HELP!! (Hannova)
Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better? (NewsBrowser)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Digital Cameras and Linux
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 02:04:39 GMT
Check out gphoto for X-windows (www.gphoto.org)
It supports 114 different digital cameras including some fujifilm
cameras. I have a MX-1700Zoom and it works with the MX-700 drivers.
So yours should probably work too.
/G�ran Lundberg
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tom Rosso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a Fujifilm MX-1200 digital camera that connects to the
> back of my computer via a serial port. The software for this
> camera has Windows 98/NT and Mac versions, but the authors didn't
> have the forsight to include Linux software. Basically, from
> what I can tell, it connects using some kind of Twain driver so
> it can be accessed from Photoshop and Corel Draw and all of those
> other wonderful expensive and buggy graphics programs. Does
> anybody have any experience hooking up this camera, or any
> Fujifilm MX-series camera, or any digital camera in general, to
> Linux. I'm currently running Mandrake 7, which is compatable
> (sort of) with RedHat. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks!
> -Tom
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Subject: Re: modems and linux...
Date: 08 Mar 2000 21:13:06 EST
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 23:37:58 +0200, plato <<38c6d855.0@news>>
shouted forth into the ether:
>can someone suggest some 56K modems that work with linux?
Almost anything that plugs into the serial port. They're much easier to
set up than internal modems as an added bonus. You can pick up a cheap
external 56K from many places, and it should work fine.
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows \ In the MS-DOStrix,
There is no Darkness in Eternity \----\ there is no fork().
But only Light too dim for us to see \
===== Usenet: ceci n'est pas une guerre des flammes =====
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 02:40:27 GMT
On Wed, 08 Mar 2000 07:21 , Masoud Pajoh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>>VIA still has busmastering EIDE driver problems.
>I think you are wrong. I have an Epox MVP3GM, a VIA MVP3 based board,
>w/2MB L2 cache. I run
>OS/2 WARP 4 + FP11, Winblows NT + SP 5, and for a bout a month now Linux
>RH6.1.
>I have no problem with OS/2 and busmastering EIDE.
>Winblows NT, is slower than OS/2, because probably the busmastering
>drivers are as well done as OS/2.
>As for Linux, I do not know yet. I am still wet behind the ear on
>Linux.
Bus mastering works fine with the MVP3 chipset & Linux although you might
have to enable it manually. Try "man hdparm" and consider the command
"hdparm -d 1 -m 16 -c 1"
--
Ray
------------------------------
From: Christopher Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CDROM I/O error
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 03:06:41 GMT
I'm having difficulty with my I/O Magic 40x CDROM while installing
Slackware 7.0. Using either smp.i or smp.s, Linux initially recognizes
my CDROM properly as 'hdc:BCD 40SB I/OMAGIC CD-ROM, ATAPI CDROM Drive',
but a few lines (in the dmesg) later it refers to it as 'ATAPI 44X
CD-ROM drive, 128kB Cache'. I was thinking this might be the cause of
the '/dev/hdc: Input/Output error' I've been recieving while trying to
mount the drive, which would also explain why 'setup' hasn't been able
to find the source media during installation. Incidentally, /dev/hda is
a Maxtor hard drive, /dev/hdb is an Iomega Zip 100 ATAPI drive, and
everything does work under Windows. Uhh, little help?
Thanks in advance,
Christopher Liu
------------------------------
From: Bruce McKenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No way to install Linux (Redhat 6.1 or Slackware 7.0) on my computer
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 03:22:12 GMT
Do you know if there is a Sentinel card installed on your motherboard? Could
be? Maybe?
my 2 cents
Saverio Domanico wrote:
> Help !
>
> No way to install Linux (Redhat 6.1 or Slackware 7.0) on my computeur.
> It seems that the Hard Disk drive is not recognised or I've a error message
> "Impossible to write on your hard drive, protected ?".
> My HD drive is an IBM Hard Disk : 371350 DJNA (Deskstar 22GXP)13.5 Go
> 7200t/mn.
> It's partionned with 3 FAT32 partitions C:, D:, E:. I've installed Windows
> 98 in the first one and I'would like to reserve the second one for Linux,
> the third one for user files.
> The mother board is an ABIT BE6 II with a Pentium III 500Mhz.
>
> I've made the same installation on my laptop computer Toshiba Satellite
> 300CDS and all is OK.
>
> Is ther someone who has encountered such a type of problem. Is there any
> solution ? Is the problem related to the HD, the Mother Board or the Bios
> configuration ?
>
> Thanks for your feedback !
>
> Saverio
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: 9 Mar 2000 03:28:14 GMT
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 18:04:47, "Ron Reaugh"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John Howland wrote in message ...
> > Gee Ron, I use VIA based MoBo's & have no IDE problems - what am I doing
> wrong?
>
>
> You sell em and are wearing blinders.
Uh, Ron. You aren't going to make friends on this group with
such unfounded attacks on John. He is one of the good guys, even
though he has the audacity to be in retail business. I bought my
K6-III from John-H and was more than happy to pay a premium to
buy from an honest vendor (I didn't think "vendor" was a bad
word). Since you like web sites, take a peek at his
resellerratings numbers. I was impressed enough to spend *more*
money with him anyway. I try to reward excellence with my
business. ...now only if he weren't so prochial about the boards
he carries (sorry John ;-).
----
Keith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: 9 Mar 2000 03:38:30 GMT
Forget it Paul. Ron picked on the wrong person in this group.
Deano is fair game, but he doesn't sell anymore. Hmmm.
It must be lonely over on .storage for Ron to pick fights on
chips. BTW, my favorite tommie is making an ass outof himself
over there too. Too bad I don' thave time to chase.
Anyway, I will stand 100% behind John Howland's reputation. I've
never met the man, but have done business with him. I was very
pleasantly surprised at the service I recieved (he went out of
his way finding what I wanted). Yes, I paid a small premium
dealing with a 7.0 on the Richter (err, pricewatch - sorry bad
vibes for those on the left coast eh? ;-) scale.
----
Keith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: 9 Mar 2000 03:41:46 GMT
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 22:51:01, "Cyberchondri@c"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, he pretty much singlehandedly 'drove' me out of the storage newsgroup.
> Even if he *was* right, say, 90% of the time, his personality is still too
> abrasive.
> Fortunately, I've learned about killfiles since then.. :-)
And you win the prize! He was right 90% of the time (when it got
to technical details), but insists on the last word, even if it's
just a one phrase flame. However he's *way* off base here.
----
Keith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: 9 Mar 2000 03:43:51 GMT
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 17:09:42, "John Howland"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Easy - http://developer.intel.com/design/PentiumIII/prodbref/
>
> "Versions that incorporate 256 KB Advanced Transfer Cache (on-die, full-speed level
>2 (L2) cache
> with Error Correcting Code (ECC) or versions that incorporate a discrete,
>half-speed, 512 KB in
> package L2 cache with ECC. "
I don't believe it! What the hell do they know? Can you
substantiate this?
Oh! ;-)
----
Keith
------------------------------
From: Stephen Lee - Post replies please <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Impasse with 2 SCSI controllers, kernel mods required?
Date: 9 Mar 2000 03:19:28 GMT
In article <8a4hce$1m2h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
teri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I have compiled a new kernel (2.2.14) with both drivers built-in. On
>boot the kernel keeps looping and timing out looking for drive 0 on the
>wrong controller! (the 1542CF). It insists on doing this whether the
>1542CF bios is enabled or disabled. However, the controller is
>recognized. Is there a way to force the boot process to go to the 2940?
Is the 1542 working correctly? Does Linux boot if you connect the
drive to the 1542CF? Where does the looping occur? When loading the
1542 driver or when mounting the root filesystem? Does it ever get to
load the 2940 driver?
You can hack the kernel source and change the order the drivers are
loaded, it is not too difficult. Or you can build an initrd and load
the drivers in the order you want.
But my guess is still that you have a resource conflict somewhere.
Stephen
------------------------------
From: "Dean_Kent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:37:58 -0800
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
John Howland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:dUvx4.400$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Easy - http://developer.intel.com/design/PentiumIII/prodbref/
>
> "Versions that incorporate 256 KB Advanced Transfer Cache (on-die,
full-speed level 2 (L2) cache
> with Error Correcting Code (ECC) or versions that incorporate a discrete,
half-speed, 512 KB in
> package L2 cache with ECC. "
>
> --
>
This was the basis of my comment that the L2 cache is full-speed. On the
other hand, it transfers data every other clock cycle, which was the basis
for my 'higher latency' comment. However, since it is much wider a 'word'
of data gets into the CPU much faster overall - therefore it is as much as 4
times faster. In other words, it has a higher latency, but also a much
higher bandwidth... and in this case, bandwidth matters.
At least, that is how I understand it...
Regards,
Dean
------------------------------
From: Jim Jerzycke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: modems and linux...
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 11:48:36 +0000
I've had outstanding results with the Zoom 2919. I've installed three of
them on machines running RedHat 6.0, 6.1 and Caldera 2.3. ALL of them
detected instantly, and consistently connect 48-52k. Just make sure you
disable the PnP feature and set it up for a regular com port/irq. It may
work under PnP...I just set it up manually to avoid any hair-pulling!
Zoom also has a bunch of Linux info on their website.
Regards, Jim
------------------------------
From: "Dean_Kent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:47:40 -0800
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Ron Reaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5Mvx4.3550$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> (4 x 12)/120 * 100 = 40% max..you said "that almost 50% of all Pentium
> II/III motherboards shipped today to OEMs are VIA Apollo Pro based" So
> that's an exaggeration for starter and the figures above is high. At best
> 1/3 are VIA as your figures tend to support.
Two things here:
1) VIA is shipping 4 million chipsets *total*, while I was talking about
PII/III chipsets.
2) The 50% figure was based upon discussions with motherboard
manufacturers - excluding Intel. These manufacturers are shipping about
50% of their total with VIA chipsets (PII/III boards specifically) -
however, Intel is still a major motherboard supplier, so the actual market
total is probably closer to 30%. I stand corrected...
>
>
> Anyone can go to www.deja.com and do a USENET power search on all: via
> busmaster problem, Feb 20 2000, 100 per page. There are 75 returns.
> Start reading.
>
> Do a USENET power search on all: intel busmaster problem, Feb 20 2000,
100
> per page. There are 34 returns. Considering that Intel outsells VIA
> ~2:1........
That isn't really an indication of the 'quantity' of problems, since it
doesn't have any contextual information for two reasons:
1) The same person may post multiple times
2) Replies that don't trim previous messages but have 'deviated' from the
original subject would still show up.
In addition, as a former vendor who sold VIA, Intel and SiS based boards (no
ALi based boards, however) I know that at least 50% of all problems are
*not* caused by the product, but by a user who doesn't know what he is
doing, or makes *assumptions* about what the problem is based upon newsgroup
posts. This could be higher or lower, depending upon the nature of the
problem and the particular group of users - however, I would not assume that
all newsgroup posts are accurate.
In fact, considering that you constantly are claiming that posts are
'erroneous' seems to be an indication that you actually recognize this
situation - however, you have obviously chosen to ignore it for purposes of
this specific argument. I don't want to claim it is intentionally
self-serving, so I'll assume that you overlooked this small detail...
Regards,
Dean
------------------------------
From: Keith Rohrer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Maxtor 40G IDE w/o BIOS support
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 22:01:30 -0600
Paul Halliday wrote:
>
> On Sun, 05 Mar 2000, Keith Rohrer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Paul Halliday wrote:
> : > On Thu, 17 Feb 2000 21:52:44 -0600, Keith Rohrer wrote
> : > : Does anyone know how to configure such a drive for its full capacity under
> : > : Linux without BIOS support?
> : > If Linux is the only OS then you can use the full 40Gb provided you
> : > are booting off another drive (alternatively a Linux boot floppy disk
> : > should do it).
> : The only problem with installing the capacity limiting jumper in that case
> : would be how to get fdisk to deal with the extra cylinders (beyond 65535).
> : Maybe your double-the-heads approach might work, at least to get the LBA
> : numbers right... Then you could just use the space beyond 32G for Linux.
>
> Erm, I said not to install the limiting jumper (that's what I meant by
> `remove the limiting jumper' - assuming you currently had it on).
I know what you said, but that doesn't work with my motherboard. "None" is
not sufficient to keep my motherboards from hanging when they see the full
size of the drive. I think it's probably when they go scanning for CD-ROMs
and such, but even setting a geometry manually didn't avoid the hang. My
only choices are to use the jumper, or to buy a new motherboard. Thus, I
concentrated on a solution when the jumper is installed, not removed.
> The
> limiting jumper seems to prevent Linux accessing anything beyond the
> 32G boundary too.
If you have a new enough (or patched) kernel, like 2.2.14, a simple
append="hdc=4892,255,63" in your /etc/lilo.conf would solve that. (Salt
the geometry to taste...)
> : > 2. _Remove_ the hard drive entry form the CMOS settings (i.e. Go in to
> : > the BIOS and tell it that there is no drive installed on the IDE
> : > channel). This should allow the machine to boot without problems.
> : For machines with Award BIOS which did support the drive, this was
> : unnecessary; for machines with Award BIOS which did *not* support the
> : drive, this was insufficient to prevent a hang.
>
> That's not sweeping - the BIOS on my TMC was also AWARD, didn't
> support the drive (hung if I tried autodetect), but would boot no
> problem so long as I set the device on the relevent channel to `NONE'
> (i.e. nothing installed there, Mr. BIOS).
Hmm.
> My new BIOS version does understand the drive, so of course I no
> longer need to remove the settings from the BIOS.
My strategy of putting the big but slow storage on the old, slow box in the
corner means I'll be fighting old BIOS for another 2-3 upgrades. :-(
[snip]
> : This might work even with the capacity limiting jumper. You'd still have
> : to feed Linux the geometry override, though.
>
> Not on my system! Once the partition table is there, Linux can boot
> off any of the partitions I've created - I don't need any kernel
> parameters at all though I see no harm in sending them if you want.
I'll try that. Read-only, but I'll try it...
> : > Linux (or maybe just fdisk) seems to have a
> : > 16-bit limit on the number of cylinders, so you can't enter more than
> : > 65,536, but the above instructions will let you use it without problem
> : As per the Large Disk HOWTO, the old Linux code that takes whatever
> : geometry lies are out there and computes a "real" geometry had a 16-bit
> : cylinder number as an intermediate value. fdisk will probably cap you at
> : 65535 cylinders if the value in the partition table is only 16 bits wide.
> : Upgrade your kernel to 2.2.14 to get around this. (If you're the type to
> : use a development-series kernel, you've already upgraded to
> : 2.3.recent-enough anyway...)
>
> {grin} Haven't used a development kernel for about a year (more in to
> getting people in work to see how stable it is - 102 days my longest
> stint - and not having to confuse those Windozey types with
> recompiling network services just because they're using different
> kernels.) Most my home boxes just miss out on 2.2.13 (one still on
> 1.1.59 - glorious hard disk corruption problems and all. :)
Well, with 2.2.14 it's a simple matter of adding:
append="hdc=4892,255,63"
to each section of my /etc/lilo.conf, and it works like a charm *with* the
capacity limiter in. It plays nicely with RedHat 6.1, and probably does
just fine on RedHat 6.0...
> : I think a 10G would still do fine for a year or two, so long as you
> : uninstall the games you haven't played in a year or so, or just re-install
> : Windows so often that it's not a problem. :-)
>
> {chortle} Are you kidding! ;) I had 26Gb of disk space before I
> upgraded (9Gb 7200RPM Seagate and 17Gb 5400RPM Maxtor) - and most of
> that had got chock full of games (virtually all original despite most
> being minimal installs!) I'd only added that 17Gb drive 8 months ago
> too ...
Between HOMM3, SMAC, and Homeworld, I don't get around to installing, let
alone playing, much else. With my digital camera software, Quicken, etc. I
still only have half my 10G drive filled. It's the MP3 files and other
junk I've downloaded (patches, upgrades, etc.) that take up all the
space...and those don't need much speed. So they go on a 5400 RPM IDE disk
in the corner or in the closet, while the games and such go on the 7200 RPM
and/or SCSI disks...
Keith
------------------------------
From: Hannova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Corel Linux and 3C905C Card HELP!!
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 03:45:38 GMT
In article <8a6p11$4m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.setup Hannova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : In article <8a6cpv$psi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> : "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> In comp.os.linux.setup Hannova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> : You've gotten farther than I have. I'm a Linux newbie and ran
into
> : the
> :> : same problem with the 3Com 3C905C.
See above.
> The C is a different card, but AFAIR, it is handled by recent
revisions
> of donald's driver, and the 3C supplied driver by all accounts works
> fairly well if you're on UP ...
It is, however it is not compiled for my kernel, and I have been unable
so far to get it to do so. What is an UP?
> ?? You'd just load it into the kernel. It's a pci card, so there are
> no parameters to give as regards irq's or io. You might want to force
> the negotiation on the link, if it's not detected right, but I can't
> think of anything else you might want to add. I.e., just load it.
The uncompiled source? I kinda got the impression reading the .c file
that it was intended for use in a compiled state. Unfortunately, the
gcc comand included in the source comments spat back all sorts of
compile errors. I'm trying to find out if I should be running it in a
certain directory, or something else that might be obvious to a
seasoned user and not to a squeaky-new newbie.
> Perhaps you could explain? The sentence you produced is nonsensical.
> How can you insert a a driver as an option? Or as a cow, come to that.
> You just insert a driver, that's all. And what's a "modconf menu"?
> And how can you insert a driver "under" one? I somewhat get the
> impression that you are talking about some gui thing whose job is
> simply to edit conf.modules? Is that it?
If you don't know, don't worry about it. As the original poster stated,
the compiled version was for a different kernel, and did me no good.
> :> I think you need to edit your conf.modules and add the line
> :>
> :> alias eth0 3c59x
> : This might work if we were talking about that driver, but as I
stated
> : above, this is for the 3C905C, which uses 3c90x. Did you actually
read
>
> Well, good for you, and no, you didn't explain, and yes, if you have
> the 3c905 driver, by all means alias eth0 to 3c905.
I'm gonna stop using subject lines - No one reads 'em. *sigh*
> : If you didn't feel like being helpful today, why did you bother
> : answering?
>
> What's unhelpful about what? Care to explain what that references to
> "modconf menus" is about? You seem to have snipped my explanation of
> how to configure conf.modules.
No, it's still there, you gave no explanation other than to say that
the line needed to be added. However unless it's compiled, I can't
alias eth0 to the driver, as I understand it.
I'll take another guess that since you've never seen the modconf menu,
it must be unique to Corel Linux.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: NewsBrowser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Subject: Re: VIA vs Intel chipsets - which is better?
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2000 04:01:55 GMT
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 19:14:08 -0500, "Neil Davis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm sorry to see this thread deteriorate so quickly into name-calling,
>because there are some legitimate chipset and driver questions I'd love to
>see addressed. I've put together a number of VIA-based systems, but
>recently I got fed up with them and have switched to the BX boards instead.
>One of the problems I've suffered with the VIA chipset is IRQ sharing. It's
>easy to end up with nicely configured systems that have more peripherals
>than available IRQ's, and my experience is that the VIA IRQ miniport driver
>doesn't allow IRQ sharing as well as the BX boards. I've seen VIA boards
>share IRQ's, but it's not the norm, and I haven't figured out how to get it
>to work as repeatably as the BX boards. For example, one of my machines has
>video, TV-tuner, video capture, SCSI, MODEM, and Soundblaster Live (requires
>2 IRQ's), USB, two IDE's, and they are all shared sociably on a BX board
>(one IRQ actually has 4 devices, and one IRQ is still listed as free). So
>question #1: is there something in the design of the IRQ hardware in the
>Intel chipset that allows it to work better with IRQ-sharing drivers, or is
>Intel just better at writing the IRQ-sharing driver, or is my experience
>with IRQ sharing not consistent with what others have seen?
I think that the answer of your question is more operating system and
driver dependent rather than chipset dependent.
Now I am speaking about a Super7 MB hear. I used to have IRQ Sharing
problems but they were solved with the last the IRQ Sharing driver
that I installed. Yes my motherboard is fully populated and is working
fine.
>
>The second problem I've had with VIA boards is poor support for certain
>devices using their busmastering drivers. For example, the Nakamichi 5x16
>CD changer hangs up when you try to play audio CD's (using the drivers from
>VIA that were available last month). I also had problems with one of the
>Creative DVD players--lots of dropouts even when busmastering enabled,
>although the Hitachi G2500 DVD player worked perfectly on the same computer.
>So question #2: is there something unique about the VIA IDE hardware that
>makes it difficult to get compatibility with more devices, or is this just a
>software maturity problem, and when will VIA finally get it right?
I found that only the default Microsoft Busmaster Drivers work the
best in Win98 for everything. This includes Intel and Via busmaster
dirvers. Apparently, the highest performance is using the default
Microsoft Bus-Master Drivers. All of the other ones love to grab your
processor CPU Usage. I have a CD-RW drive and it only works with
the default microsoft busmaster drivers. Most likely not an ViA vs
Intel issue. but more likely an operating system issue here.
>
>My recommendation to potential motherboard buyers has been to go with the
>lower-cost VIA boards if they aren't going to have lots of devices that
>require IRQ's or if they are going to stick with IDE devices that are known
>to work with the VIA drivers. The VIA boards are great for people who don't
>experiment much with different peripherals--I believe this is exactly what
>Michael Dell was referring to when he recently said: "We found the AMD
>environment to be much more fragile ... than equivalent Intel systems." I'm
>not interested in starting a flame war--I'm curious whether others had the
>same negative experiences with the VIA chipset. Even more to the point, I
>am currently interested in buying an Athlon system, but I'm gun-shy about
>going with the KX-133 chipset. Any reports on how well it supports IRQ
>sharing?
I think Micheal Dell is nothing but an Intel Marketing Troll and was
paid to make that annoucement.
I am willing to say though. That not everyone should make a system
from scratch. There are alot of pitfalls that can occur when improper
matching of components happen. This is with Intel as well as VIA or
AMD chipsets.
><snip>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
