Linux-Hardware Digest #594, Volume #12 Sun, 2 Apr 00 00:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Found a deal on a modem! (Prasanth Kumar)
�20 Fasttrak66 ("btinternet")
Re: Linux sucks (James Daniels)
Re: Found a deal on a modem! ("Joseph C. Kopec")
ActionTEC: PCI Controller Modem v. Linmodem ("Joseph C. Kopec")
Q: cpuinfo reports no cache on PIII coppermine ("Robert L. McCormick")
Re: Help LILO 10101... Problem!!! (Graham Bosworth)
Re: LAN transfer speed (Graham Bosworth)
Re: Upgrade Redhat 6.2 (Bryan)
Re: WHich ATA 66 controlers does linux support? (Bryan)
Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP (Mark Bratcher)
Does all sdram have ecc (Barnet Wagman)
Re: USB mouse ("Gregson")
Re: Does all sdram have ecc (Dave Edick)
Re: Does all sdram have ecc (GarbMan)
Re: PCI modem (Rod Smith)
computer died (Timothy M Lowe)
Re: Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP ("Gene Heskett")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Prasanth Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Found a deal on a modem!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 00:31:15 GMT
Steve Martin wrote:
>
> No, this is not a continuation of the "this is a great deal"
> thread we had a week or two ago. I just stumbled across this,
> and thought I'd share it.
>
> The local Circuit City ran an ad for an ActionTec modem,
> advertised to work with everything from DOS to WinNT.
> Linux not mentioned. I went to the store, looked at the
> modem, decided to take a chance (since it said it worked
> under DOS). Took it home, pulled the venerable Zoom 28.8
> VFP, and popped it in. After a little fiddling, it worked!
> No WinModem sludge required... it's an honest-to-goodness
> hardware-based modem. Down side is that it's an ISA, so
> theoretically the throughput is a little restricted,
> but so far it seems to be working like a champ. Just
> downloaded two 2-M files from bmrt.org, and am now using
> it to send this message.
<snip>
Yes, ActionTec supports Linux for their hardware. I have
seen the "works with Linux" on some of their cards. I have
no personal experience in using them though.
--
Prasanth Kumar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "btinternet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: �20 Fasttrak66
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 01:52:29 -0000
I saw a page somwhere(forgoten where) that detailed
a mod to a cheap promise ata controler, 100 R across
two pins of the chip turned it into a fastrak
any truth in it?
and will it work with linux?
richard
------------------------------
From: James Daniels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.portable,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: Linux sucks
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 00:40:03 GMT
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:59:32 +0100, Lion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JEDIDIAH
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >>On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 00:24:56 +0100, Lion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>In article <38e212ef.3041845@news>, Jan Knutar <[email protected]>
> >>>writes
> >>>>My Win95 runs so much more stable after explorer crashes. Without the
> >>>>taskbar and desktop icons, the system is not only faster, but more stable!
> >>>
> >>>I recently purchased a CD with a quicktime3 movie on it. To view this in
> >>>windows I had to reinstall the whole system. Pretty bad. But on the
> >>>other hand, it's tit for tat. There is *no* way of viewing a qt3 movie
> >>>on Linux atm.
> >>
> >> Convert it to cinepak with Quicktime Pro 4.x and vmware.
> >
> >Doesn't qt pro cost money?
>
> Actually, it's running vmware+Windows that would 'cost money'.
> Quicktime Pro is only 30 bux.
>
> [deletia]
> --
>
> It is not the advocates of free love and software
> that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
> advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
> one option among many, like in some regime where
> product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
Ok, here is my input on this subject
I run QT3 movies all the time on my linux box. You need to download the
latest source code for xanim and recompile it to use video decompression
DLL's. You can read more about this at http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/
I hope this help
Jim
------------------------------
From: "Joseph C. Kopec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Found a deal on a modem!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 01:14:06 GMT
I saw an ActionTEC "voice mail modem" today at CompUSA (price: $79.99)
the box for which said (i) it worked under DOS and Linux, (ii) it was a
PCI card, (iii) it used Lucent technology and (iv) it had an "on board
processor". Does anyone know whether this is a controller-based modem
(as "on board processor" would suggest) or a host-controller modem with
a "linmodem" driver (I know that certain Lucent host-controller modems
have Linux drivers available)? In either case, its great to see a
manufacturer advertising Linux compatibility on the box. The box wasn't
too clear whether it was a Class 2 or 2.0 modem -- I am interested
because I want to use mgetty+sendfax/vgetty and I have been having a
hard time getting this to work with my Creative Modem Blaster Flash 56II
ISA Controller-Based Modem.
Prasanth Kumar wrote:
>
> Steve Martin wrote:
> >
> > No, this is not a continuation of the "this is a great deal"
> > thread we had a week or two ago. I just stumbled across this,
> > and thought I'd share it.
> >
> > The local Circuit City ran an ad for an ActionTec modem,
> > advertised to work with everything from DOS to WinNT.
> > Linux not mentioned. I went to the store, looked at the
> > modem, decided to take a chance (since it said it worked
> > under DOS). Took it home, pulled the venerable Zoom 28.8
> > VFP, and popped it in. After a little fiddling, it worked!
> > No WinModem sludge required... it's an honest-to-goodness
> > hardware-based modem. Down side is that it's an ISA, so
> > theoretically the throughput is a little restricted,
> > but so far it seems to be working like a champ. Just
> > downloaded two 2-M files from bmrt.org, and am now using
> > it to send this message.
> <snip>
>
> Yes, ActionTec supports Linux for their hardware. I have
> seen the "works with Linux" on some of their cards. I have
> no personal experience in using them though.
>
> --
> Prasanth Kumar
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Joseph C. Kopec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ActionTEC: PCI Controller Modem v. Linmodem
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 01:21:33 GMT
To follow up my earlier post re ActionTEC: The excellent Gromit
winmodem page -- http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html -- says the
ActionTEC PCI56012 is a controller modem, and that the Lucent
"linmodems" are primarily Lucent LT WinModems. To quote the gromit page:
********
5. How about PCI modems? Are all PCI modems winmodems? No, there are at
least three controller-based PCI modems. If you are curious, these
modems are the Multitech MT5634ZPX-PCI, the Actiontec PCI56012 (IBM
33L4618), and the 3Com/USR 3CP5610. The Well Communications FM-56PCI-TP
has Linux support, but I have not received a user confirmation yet.
6. I've heard that there are linmodems... so do winmodems work with
Linux now?
Some of them do. Whether your winmodem will work depends a lot on the
modem chipset you are using and your PC's processor. Currently, we are
primarily talking about the Lucent LT WinModems.
------------------------------
From: "Robert L. McCormick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Q: cpuinfo reports no cache on PIII coppermine
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:37:16 -0600
I just put together a new PIII 800 MHz machine. /proc/cpuinfo reports
0K of cache in my new processor. However, the bios reports "256K
Enabled" when I boot. Also, intel's utility for identifying processors
claims that I have 256K of cache.
Here is a paste of the output from /cat/cpuinfo, does anyone know what
the problem might be? Also, the kernel version is 2.2.12 and I'm running
RH 6.1.
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 8
model name : Pentium III (Coppermine)
stepping : 3
cpu MHz : 801.838416
cache size : 0 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
sep_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 2
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
mca
cmov pat pse36 mmx osfxsr kni
bogomips : 799.54
Thanks for any info.
Robert
------------------------------
From: Graham Bosworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
uk.comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: Help LILO 10101... Problem!!!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 02:01:51 GMT
Irv wrote:
>
> Martin wrote:
>
>> ...
>
> Yes, i had this problem... it's not the master boot record that lilo has messed
> up, it's the FAT tables. If you have Norton disk doctor, run that and it
> should sort you out :-)
>
> Irv
--
I may be wrong, but I think that Irv has mis-interpreted. The problem
is not that LiLo failed, but that _it_ detected the problem. Was LiLo
ever told that the discs had been changed?
Graham
You pressed a key - Windoze must now reboot you to effect changes...
------------------------------
From: Graham Bosworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: LAN transfer speed
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 02:01:52 GMT
Frenzy Killa wrote:
>
> I'm having low transfer speeds between two computers connected through a
> single twisted pair cable.
> ...
> When I download files from the linux ftp-server to the Win2K box I get a
> speed varying between 1500KB/s and 2500KB/s. This to me seems low but still
> ok. However when uploading I get a constant speed of 131KB/s. This is
> extremely low and totally unacceptable considering that the two boxes are
> connected solely through a single TP-cable without sending data through
> hubs, switches or the Internet.
> ...
Assuming that you are running Samba, your /etc/smb.conf should contain
"socket options = TCP_NODELAY IPTOS_LOWDELAY SO_SNDBUF=8192". There's a
bit more to it, but I wouldn't want to help a killer.
Graham
If I hadn't seen such poorness, I could live with being rich.
------------------------------
From: Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Upgrade Redhat 6.2
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 02:04:24 GMT
: Bryan wrote:
: > one thing that annoys me (did a very clean fresh install of 6.2) is
: > that 'shutdown -h now' doesn't always halt the system. in fact, many
: > times, it never even GETS to that phase of shutdown. similarly,
: > reboot doesn't work reliably.
: >
: > very strange.
I found the problem: I had commented out the last 3 entries in
/etc/inittab, for ttys and consoles. not sure why that would matter
but uncommenting and kill-1 1 fixed things.
weird.
--
Bryan, http://Grateful.Net (ANTISPAM: email is my name at my web's domain)
(c) 2000. Publishing and/or relaying of this material on all forums other than
USENET implies agreeing to a consultancy fee of US$150 per posting. You must
obtain a written permit before you publish. Violators are subject to civil
prosecution for Copyright Infringement as applicable. Publication by C|NET
and Microsoft Networks expressly prohibited.
------------------------------
From: Bryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WHich ATA 66 controlers does linux support?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 02:06:15 GMT
I have the promise and the abit (hpt66) cards.
on windows (gak!) the highpoint chip is quite a bit faster. loading
large .wav (audio) files can be a minute quicker on the hpt66.
haven't tried under linux yet but I would think it would be similar.
(I'm not sure if ide can be trusted under smp, so I'm hesitant to play
with this until 2.4.stable).
William Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Looking to use RH 6.2, Caldera 2.3 or Turbolinux 4.0
: not sure which.
: does any of these do better which ata 66 controlers and if so which
: controllers?
: the local store has one by SIIG prtty cheap.
: thanks,
: Bill
--
Bryan, http://Grateful.Net (ANTISPAM: email is my name at my web's domain)
(c) 2000. Publishing and/or relaying of this material on all forums other than
USENET implies agreeing to a consultancy fee of US$150 per posting. You must
obtain a written permit before you publish. Violators are subject to civil
prosecution for Copyright Infringement as applicable. Publication by C|NET
and Microsoft Networks expressly prohibited.
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 22:05:44 -0500
Hi.
I have a ViewSonice PS775 monitor running at 1024x768. I have a Stealth
3D 4000 AGP card (4MB of video RAM) and XFree86 3.3.5.
I'm trying to run 32bit color. I can run 16-bit OK and 24-bit OK. The
problem with 24-bit is that Netscape stuff goes black & white with icons
and symbols on the messenger screen and on the toolbars (a bug noted by
Netscape on their web site).
When I try to run 32 bit color, it looks almost normal (my background
image is OK) but dialogs and things are really squirrely. Only pieces
show up where they should and other parts are jammed to the top of the
screen (or something like that).
Has anyone had experience with this in particular? I've played around
alot with video settings in XF86Config, read the
XFree86-Video-Timings-HOWTO, etc. The thing's driving me crazy. (I also
have been trying to get it to run as nice as it does under Windoze and
have not been totally successful.)
Any help appreciated.
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles. Use Linux!
------------------------------
From: Barnet Wagman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Does all sdram have ecc
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 21:15:57 -0600
Does all new sdram have ecc? I'm shopping for a new (Athol-based)
Linux box and was wondering if this is something that will be
hard to find. The main vendors don't mention ecc in their specs.
Thanks,
Barnet Wagman
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Gregson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: USB mouse
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 03:29:56 GMT
I made it work :-)
I upgraded the kernel to 2.3.37, but I think the crux was changing the
protocol in XF86Config from usb to PS/2 (though XFree86 4.0 documentation
tells me to use "usb").
I did try the backport for 2.2.14 on 2.2.12-20 (comes with RH6.1) but I
couldn't make that work, though I am not sure I tried changing the protocol
as above (I don't why I didn't...)
Gregson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:M4oF4.11$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have an IntelliMouse Explorer and wish to use it on the USB port under
> RH6.1, which I have upgraded to kernel version 2.3.30 and Xfree86 4.0.
> Despite having followed the USB guide
> (http://linuxusbguide.sourceforge.net/USB-guide-1.0.5) I haven't had much
> success.
>
> I know it isn't really worth the time or effort, but I am stubborn. So if
> anybody has a suggestion, please post it.
>
> thanks
>
> Mark
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Edick)
Subject: Re: Does all sdram have ecc
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 03:46:44 GMT
No, most doesn't. If you're talking about DIMMs, the 72 bit ones are ECC.
Most are 64 bit and aren't ECC. ECC DIMMs are frequently sold as "server
memory". They always cost more than the usual 64 bit ones. I just poped
onto www.crucial.com (my favorite memory place) and they are currently
selling ECC DIMMs at about 10% more than the non-ECC type.
As far as it being hard to find, yes and no. ECC memory is pretty easy to
find in itself. But if you're looking for a vendor that includes it in their
base systems, you'll have a long search ahead of you. Virtually no vendor
will consider the extra cost of ECC memory worthwhile in a non-server system.
Extra cost for improved reliability? You gotta be kidding. If it doesn't
"give more megahertz", they can't sell it. On the other hand, most clone
shops will happily build a system with ECC memory on request. Virtually all
modern motherboards will work with either type of memory.
On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 21:15:57 -0600, Barnet Wagman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does all new sdram have ecc? I'm shopping for a new (Athol-based)
>Linux box and was wondering if this is something that will be
>hard to find. The main vendors don't mention ecc in their specs.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Barnet Wagman
>
>email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: GarbMan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does all sdram have ecc
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 22:04:04 -0600
Barnet Wagman wrote:
>
> Does all new sdram have ecc? I'm shopping for a new (Athol-based)
> Linux box and was wondering if this is something that will be
> hard to find. The main vendors don't mention ecc in their specs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Barnet Wagman
>
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No.
One quick way to check if the mobo of the system, or possibly the system
itself if you don't know the mobo mfg., is to use the "Memory Selector"
at crucial.com.
If it shows ECC memory modules as an option for the system, the system
supports ECC (or at least it is supposed to).
Generally speaking, most boards (except for some low-end) support ECC.
I don't know where you have been looking, but all manufacturers sites
that I have looked at clearly state when the product supports ECC, as it
is generally considered a necessity in "mission-critical" applications.
Just because the system supports ECC doesn't mean that a pre-configured
system will automatically be equipped with ECC SDRAM though.
HTH...
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
Subject: Re: PCI modem
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 04:23:09 GMT
[Posted and mailed]
In article <8c5fbh$1dh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Can a PCI modem be used with Linux kernel 2.2.14 or 2.3.99-pre3? If so, how
> can I configure it? I'm using S.u.S.E. 6.2. Thanks in advance
That depends on the modem. Most, but not all, PCI modems are software
modems. Most, but not all, software modems are unsupported in Linux. If
your modems is a software modem, check http://www.linmodems.org for
information on supported models, drivers, etc. Especially if it's based on
a Lucent chipset, you'll have better luck with a 2.2.14 kernel than a
2.3.99-pre3 kernel.
If it's a "real" modem with a UART, you can use it just like any other
"real" modem, be it ISA, PCI, or external.
--
Rod Smith, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux networking & WordPerfect for Linux
------------------------------
From: Timothy M Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: computer died
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 04:44:08 GMT
SUMMARY:
The day after I installed a 2nd hard drive and installed Linux on the
2nd draiuve my computer died. I know Linux had nothing do with that so
I suspected the power supply may have been over taxed with the 2nd
drive. Well the power supply was good so I replaced the motherboard.
This worked, but the system went tits-up ~4 hours later. As you can
imagine I'm a little confused why I might be toasting my motherboards.
Some details. If you need more let me know. This might get a little
confusing so be patient.
1st system:
AZZA PII ATX with slot 1 for celeron chip
500 Mhz celeron with auto detect bus speed set in the BIOS
10.8 Ghz MAXTOR hard drive (10.3 on BIOS auto detect, 10.8 after
MAXTOR BIOS upgrade)
128 Meg RAM
CDROM, floppy etc.
This system lasted 6 months until I added a 2nd hard drive.
The power just wouldn't come on. I'd hit the power button and nothing
would happen. The power supply checked-out because when I jumped the
ATX power connection the fan came on (this could still not mean
anything). I tried to reset mt BIOS but no good.
IS IT POSSIBLE THE CHEAP POWER SUPPLY BURNED-UP MY MOTHERBOARD?
The BIOS recognized my 2nd drive as 10.2 Gig (full capacity), but Linux
woulded recognize either drive for what they were.
2nd system:
replaced motherboard with a socket 370 Tyan ATX motherboard and this
one only lasted a few hours. At least now I was able to watch it die.
This is the senario. The computer after powered down, came on again by
itself and boot into linux, by default at the lilo prompt. but both the
keyboard and mouse inputs were not recognized so I couldn't log-in.
After powering the system on and off a few times the system just
wouldn't come on at all.
I don't want to buy a new motherboard everday. But don't know what
else to do.
HELP. HELP.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 2000 23:21:53 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP
Unrot13 this;
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gene Heskett sends Greetings to Mark Bratcher;
MB> Hi.
MB> I have a ViewSonice PS775 monitor running at 1024x768. I have a
MB> Stealth
MB> 3D 4000 AGP card (4MB of video RAM) and XFree86 3.3.5.
Hummm, 4 megs you say. Do the math, Mark. 32 bits is a 4 byte
broadside read, so 1024x768x4 is 3.145728 megabytes of just the visible
raster screen data. And the cards processor needs room to do its thing.
Just off-hand, I'd say the card is out of memory, or close enough to be
in serious trouble. Some cards also render the sync as part of the
picture image, which would be enough more memory tied up to plumb
cripple it.
Basicly, if you want to run 32 bit color, either scale it back to
800x600, or get a card with more memory. 8 megs would help, and they
are commodity cards. 16 would speed things up even more, and 32 megs
would make some programs fly.
Cheers, Gene
--
Gene Heskett, CET, UHK |Amiga A2k Zeus040, Linux @ 400mhz
Ch. Eng. @ WDTV-5 |This Space for rent
RC5-Moo! 350kkeys/sec, Seti@home 16 hrs a block
email gene underscore heskett at iolinc dot net
This messages reply content, but not any previously quoted material, is
� 2000 by Gene Heskett, all rights reserved.
--
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
