Linux-Hardware Digest #596, Volume #12 Sun, 2 Apr 00 14:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: SuSe 6.3 & Cable Modem ("Peter T. Breuer")
Modem only works once per session (James)
Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !! (Lucky)
EZONICS EZ CAM (USB) Support? (Young4ert)
Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100 (Bob Moore)
Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100 (Bob Moore)
Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !! ("Toolman")
DPMS badness (David Linton)
decstations waiting for linux! (dONo)
Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !! (Ronald Bruck)
Re: Promise Boot Problem? (Michael Kelly)
Re: computer died (Frank Miller)
IDE problems with Linux ("Robert S. Phillips")
How important is ecc for non-server? (Barnet Wagman)
lm-sensors, making it work? ("Gene Heskett")
Re: True requirements for Lexmark Optra Color 40 SIMMs? (Tim Dixon)
Re: Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100 (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Multiport Ethernet Cards (Mark Davis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SuSe 6.3 & Cable Modem
Date: 2 Apr 2000 14:03:39 GMT
Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I need a hand here.. I am doing my "Read the Bloody Manual" requirements in
: installing Linux, (along with a number of other sources), but I am stuck at
: the present.
: Linux SuSe 6.3 is installed and running, but I am having trouble getting my
: Realtek RTL8029 & Motorola (CyberSurfer) Modem to be recognized, let alone
: working.....
Realtek MODEM? Surely the Realtek's are ethernet cards?
: Anyone knowledgable with this hardware and distribution.. ? The manual is
: not very clear when it comes to cable modems and ethernet cards. If I can
There's nothing to do. Just load the driver for the card. Mind you, I
find no mention of the realtek you mention in my kernel source
(2.2.10). The only realtek cards I know are their pci ne2000 emulation
(which has the ne2k-pci driver), and their pci rtl8139, which is a
100BT card, with the rtl8139 driver:
/usr/src/linux/drivers/net/rtl8139.c:MODULE_DESCRIPTION("RealTek RTL8129/8139 Fast
Ethernet driver");
If the modem is a real modem, then it is supported.
But I am confused. Are you talking about one thing or two?
: get beyond this, I'll move on to my next step.. (Sound card), which isn't
: supported or recognized!
Pretty well all sound cards are.
Peter
------------------------------
From: James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Modem only works once per session
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 14:30:16 GMT
I have a Rockwell PCI 56K internal modem on com3 running under Linux
Mandrake 7.0.
If I start up KDE or Gnome and then immediatley open kppp and click
"connect" the modem will initialize and dial, albeit very slowly then I get
an error message saying. "The pppd daemod died unexpectedly." or
"Timed out while waithing for ppp panel."
(or something like that)
Then if i try to connect again it simply says; "Sorry modem is busy."
Does anyone know how to fix this as my modem worked fine in corel linux?
Regards.
JL
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !!
From: Lucky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 07:45:39 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Prasanth Kumar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Lucky wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Lucky
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >BeOS just
>> released Their FREE version 5 for the PC. But, it's
>> >alittle
>> know fact that they also released a free Linux
>> >version
>> >too.
>> This doesn't use the BeOS EB file system but your
>> >Linux ext2
>> system. The image is only 20mb. but the download is
>> >38mb
><snip>
>
>I tried out this free BeOS and it looks nice but the major
problem
>is poor hardware support... There is less supported hardware
than
>Linux had 2-3 years ago! The interesting thing is they have bash
>and all the gnu utilities in there and much of the Unixisms
even if
>only skin deep. Given that the MacOS is also now Unix based, it
>looks like Microsoft is the only company without a Unix like OS!
>
>--
>Prasanth Kumar
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Very true to a degree. I for one had absolutely no hardware
problems. If you go to Be's site they have a hardware
compatabilty list. Plus some hardware not on the list still
works in some cases.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: Young4ert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: EZONICS EZ CAM (USB) Support?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 11:12:45 -0400
Hi,
Can anyone please tell me if the EZONICS EZ CAM (USB) is supported under
Lnux? If so, where can I get the software for the CAM under Linux?
TIA.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS> Remove the "4" from e-mail address to respond.
------------------------------
From: Bob Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 16:31:09 +0100
Hi, I'm new to Linux and I am having difficulty finding a driver to use
with the above Laser Printer. Has anyone any ideas where I might find
one?
Bob Moore
------------------------------
From: Bob Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 16:30:38 +0100
Hi, I'm new to Linux and I am having difficulty finding a driver to use
with the above Laser Printer. Has anyone any ideas where I might find
one?
Bob Moore
------------------------------
From: "Toolman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !!
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 11:32:29 -0700
For some of us newbies, just what is BeOS and how is it used?
Thanks,
Dennis, WI
"Lucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Prasanth Kumar
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Lucky wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Lucky
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >BeOS just
> >> released Their FREE version 5 for the PC. But, it's
> >> >alittle
> >> know fact that they also released a free Linux
> >> >version
> >> >too.
> >> This doesn't use the BeOS EB file system but your
> >> >Linux ext2
> >> system. The image is only 20mb. but the download is
> >> >38mb
> ><snip>
> >
> >I tried out this free BeOS and it looks nice but the major
> problem
> >is poor hardware support... There is less supported hardware
> than
> >Linux had 2-3 years ago! The interesting thing is they have bash
> >and all the gnu utilities in there and much of the Unixisms
> even if
> >only skin deep. Given that the MacOS is also now Unix based, it
> >looks like Microsoft is the only company without a Unix like OS!
> >
> >--
> >Prasanth Kumar
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> Very true to a degree. I for one had absolutely no hardware
> problems. If you go to Be's site they have a hardware
> compatabilty list. Plus some hardware not on the list still
> works in some cases.
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
------------------------------
From: David Linton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: DPMS badness
Date: 02 Apr 2000 17:39:37 +0100
I'm running Red Hat 6.1 on a dual Celeron 400 system, and
it all works fine except that intermittently (about 30% of
the time) starting X causes my monitor to enter suspend
mode. Normally I can fix this by killing the X server with
Ctrl-Alt-Backspace and restarting X before the monitor (an
ADI MicroScan G66 operating through a Voodoo Banshee) has
finished readjusting to console mode--but this doesn't
work always, in which case I'm stuck in suspend mode until
the computer reboots.
It looks like the video card is getting the timings wrong
somehow, but I don't really know why it should only happen
with X. Increasing the resolution makes the problem more
severe, but decreasing it doesn't make it much stabler.
I'm currently using XF86_SVGA to drive the video card;
Creative's own XF86_Banshee doesn't fix the problem. The
HorizSync and VertRefresh entries in XF86Config are taken
straight from the monitor's manual (a CD-Rom with a
Windows executable reading flashy hypertext in a
proprietary format, but don't get me started on that.....)
Does anyone have any idea what might be going wrong?
rgds
David Linton
------------------------------
From: dONo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: decstations waiting for linux!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 12:44:04 -0400
I've got two Decstation 5000 model 240s with 128 megs RAM, dual 2 gig
storage expansion boxes, 19" monitors and keys & hockey puck rodents. I
was waiting for the mouse and key patches to be available before
starting the project, but, now we're moving. I would like to pass the
project on to someone who would appreciate them! Offers are accepted.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Ronald Bruck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Guys,Guys BeOS For Linux Is Here !!
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 09:47:29 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lucky
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Prasanth Kumar
:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Lucky wrote:
:>>
:>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:Lucky
:>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>> >BeOS just
:>> released Their FREE version 5 for the PC. But, it's
:>> >alittle
:>> know fact that they also released a free Linux
:>> >version
:>> >too.
:>> This doesn't use the BeOS EB file system but your
:>> >Linux ext2
:>> system. The image is only 20mb. but the download is
:>> >38mb
:><snip>
:>
:>I tried out this free BeOS and it looks nice but the major
:problem
:>is poor hardware support... There is less supported hardware
:than
:>Linux had 2-3 years ago! The interesting thing is they have bash
:>and all the gnu utilities in there and much of the Unixisms
:even if
:>only skin deep. Given that the MacOS is also now Unix based, it
:>looks like Microsoft is the only company without a Unix like OS!
:>
:>--
:>Prasanth Kumar
:>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:>
:>
:Very true to a degree. I for one had absolutely no hardware
:problems. If you go to Be's site they have a hardware
:compatabilty list. Plus some hardware not on the list still
:works in some cases.
I've tried BeOS on both the PowerPC and x86 platforms since the
beginning. It's a very well-built OS, and it's interesting to speculate
on what it would be like now had Apple bought IT instead of NeXT,
but--it just doesn't have enough productive applications to DO anything.
I put it on, play with it awhile, then recover the disk space for
something more useful. Perhaps by now there are scads of third-party
programs, but I'm not very interested in spending another couple thou on
software which duplicates my Macintosh, Windows and Linux stuff.
With Linux, out-of-the-box you get an enormous collection of utilities,
games, word processors, spreadsheets, compilers, multimedia, etc. etc.
With BeOS you get a couple of demos. In fact, there are fewer demos
than with the original release for the PowerPC--at least, with the
Personal version under Win2K. Better integrated than Linux, of
course--if you have the right hardware.
Supposedly BeOS scales VERY well with multiple processors. Since I have
an Athlon, for which no multiprocessor mainboards yet exist, I can't
swear to this. Has anybody any direct experience with running BeOS and
Linux side-by-side on a dual Pentium system? How do they compare?
I had some hardware problems to start. BeOS doesn't support my FireGL
Pro 1000 card, and came up in 640x480 grayscale. When I swapped in a
3dfx card, BeOS came up OK--but Win2K quit working. Oh well. (I
eventually coaxed Win2K back.)
--Ron Bruck
--
Due to University fiscal constraints, .sigs may not be exceed one
line.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Kelly)
Subject: Re: Promise Boot Problem?
Date: 2 Apr 2000 16:42:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Abe Waranowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the info!
>
Sure thing. I hope you get it going. If you should happen
to get the dma to kick in reliably please post as one day
I'd like to get this going full speed, if it isn't already.
One guy I conversed with about this talked about going from
benchmarks of around 5 MB/sec to 9.x MB/sec. so it would be
nice to take advantage of the speed if I could do it without
glitches. :)
--
Mike
--
"I don't want to belong to any club that would have *me* as a member!"
-- Groucho Marx
------------------------------
From: Frank Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: computer died
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 17:11:06 GMT
Timothy M Lowe wrote:
>
> 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.
Replace your power supply. It is probably marginal.
------------------------------
From: "Robert S. Phillips" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: IDE problems with Linux
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 17:25:06 GMT
HELP! I have a problem that has me completely stumped. I have built
half-dozen linux boxes without a problem like I've run into this time.
Two weeks ago I upgraded my home dual-boot machine (also home built).
It is dual-boot to allow my wife to use AOL on Win98 for e-mail. I got
a new motherboard, memory, video, replaced everthing except the hard
disk. It worked OK but it was slow because the old harddisk did not
support DMA. So, I decided to finish the upgrade with a new hard
drive. I went to Best Buy and got a WD 15.3 Gb 7200 rpm UDMA-66,
plugged it in, and I used the WD install disk to copy the Win98
partitions. Then I booted linux, created the file system, mounted and
copied my linux system into a new tree. After swapping disks, I planned
to finish by booting from a rescue disk, mounting my linux file system,
and installing LILO. Win98 comes up as it should, but I can't boot
Linux from a floppy! I have tried RedHat and SuSE install disks and
RAMLinux rescue disks and they all hang when they probe the IDE
channels. Even if I unplug the harddisk and CD-Rom, Linux still hangs
when the kernel loads. The final message is:
VP_IDE: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
ide0: BM-DMA at 0xb000-oxb007, BIOS settings: hda: DMA, hdb: pio
ide1: BM-DMA at 0xb008-0xb00f, BIOS settings: hdc: DMA, hdd: DMA
Is there a problem with the mobo? Why did it work before I changed
drives?
Motherboard: FIC VA-503A, 1MB cache
Memory: 128MB PC-100
CPU: AMD-K6-2, 500 MHz
Video: 3dfx Velocity 100
HD: Western Digital 15.3 Gb, 7200 rpm, UDMA-66
CD-Rom: generic IDE 10X
I am writing this using Win98 [:-( instead of Linux. There is a big
improvement in the performance of Win98, by the way.
Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
Rob
------------------------------
From: Barnet Wagman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How important is ecc for non-server?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 12:30:21 -0500
Apparently I've been running Linux for years on systems
without ecc memory. How important &| useful is ecc for
a non-server Linux system? I'm about to get some new
hardware, to be used as a single user system, primarily
for number crunching and software development.
Thanks,
Barnet Wagman
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: 2 Apr 2000 12:46:27 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: lm-sensors, making it work?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Unrot13 this;
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It looks like I need some help here folks.
I have compiled and installed the latest ic2 and lm-sensors stuff,
modprobed according to the docs so that there is quite a few of i2c and
lm-sensers related stuff showing in an lsmod report, installed the
libraries, modified /etc/conf.modules, pretty much the whole maryann.
The ./prog/sensord/sensord apparently runs, returning a process number,
but ./prog/sensor/sensor reports it can't open the /proc directory, and
there is no /proc/i2c or /proc/sensord directory.
I'm probably missing something in the fine print of an overly verbosely
divided set of docs, or VIA has a set of teeth in my shorts again.
I see there are notes about the VIA chipset in the FAQ, and I think
thats the chipset on this TYAN S1590S mobo.
Has anyone succeeded in making it work, on thos mobo, with a AMD
K6-2/3Dnow cpu?, and if so, would you /please/ post the details.
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.
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Dixon)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.periphs.printers
Subject: Re: True requirements for Lexmark Optra Color 40 SIMMs?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 17:38:21 GMT
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 19:36:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott
Alfter) wrote:
>In article <8bh8m0$5rn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Dan Harkless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Grant Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> What sorts of documents are you printing? If it's things like
>>> these, then I see no reason to tear your hair out looking for a
>>> suitable 32 or 64MB SIMM when we've demonstrated several 16MB SIMMs
>>> that will solve the problem.
>>
>>I was spooked by everyone saying "you want to add _at_least_ 16MB to this
>>thing". ;^> I figured I better go at least one step up from that to 32MB,
>>and then while looking at pricewatch.com I saw that 64MB could be had quite
>>cheap, so I figured since this is a one-time purchase that'll affect the
>>hard limit of how big a document I can print, so I might as well go for
>>broke.
>
>Given that the printer will only handle up to 36 megs (4+32), a 64-meg SIMM
>would be a waste. Yes, buy.com said it'd take a 64-meg SIMM, but the
>manual says it'll only take up to a 32-meg SIMM. With that said, a 32-meg
>SIMM ought to handle any print job. That which isn't used for rendering
>pages can be used as a print buffer, which allows your computer to stream a
>job to the printer in one shot and then go on to doing other things, instead
>of having to fill the buffer, wait for it to empty, and then repeat dozens
>of times through a large print job. (If you do the math, a letter-size page
>at 600 dpi with 4 inks would need just over 16 megs to hold a CMYK bitmap of
>the page. That gets cut to 4 megs for black-only printing, but swells to 24
>megs for CMYKcm photo printing. A 16-meg SIMM will enable the printer to
>handle _most_ jobs, but a 32-meg SIMM ought to handle _all_ jobs that the
>printer can render.
>
> _/_
> / v \
>(IIGS( Scott Alfter (salfter at (yo no quiero spam) delphi dot com)
> \_^_/ http://salfter.dyndns.org
What happens if you don't have enough memory, just out of curiosity?
Mine is on its way (well, technically buy.com doesn't ship on the
weekend, of course, so it'll be on its way tomorrow) and I think I've
got a 32MB SIMM floating around; if not I can buy one easily enough.
I'm basically just curious. Does it print slowly, not print, print an
error message of some sort, or what?
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Doh! 32-bit @1024x768 acts weird! HELP
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 12:49:31 -0400
Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> 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.
Hi Gene,
Thanks for the reply.
Actually, I _did_ do the math (as you say) and came up with the 3.14..MB
which I thought would work with my 4MB card. I have no idea how much
"extra" the video card needs to really do the work, so I concluded that
it _may_ work. I just wasn't sure. Is there a commonly known guideline
as to what percentage (or perhaps integer multiple) of the cards video
RAM is needed for the video card just to "do it's thing"?
Anyway, thanks for the advice. I'll check into a beefier video card (the
Stealth is, alas, not upgradeable). For now, to keep Netscape looking
nice I'm running at 16-bit color.
Mark
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles. Use Linux!
------------------------------
From: Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Printer Driver: Panasonic KXP 6100
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 12:52:04 -0400
Bob Moore wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm new to Linux and I am having difficulty finding a driver to use
> with the above Laser Printer. Has anyone any ideas where I might find
> one?
>
> Bob Moore
Bob,
I _think_ the Panasonic lasers do something like PCL4.5 (strange).
That's _less_ than a LaserJet 5 (which does PCL5). So, I'd hazard a
guess that you could install it as a LaserJet II or LaserJet 4. If you
have the manual for the Panasonic, check what it says about emulation.
--
Mark Bratcher
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles. Use Linux!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Davis)
Subject: Re: Multiport Ethernet Cards
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 17:56:23 GMT
In message <8c6k15$7f7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
:>
:>Does anybody know if there is a PCI multi-port Ethernet NIC available
:>anywhere?
I just bought a used Compaq dual port 10/100 PCI card on ebay and installed it
in my Linux box. It uses the tlan module and works great.
Mark Davis
San Angelo, TX
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
