Linux-Hardware Digest #7, Volume #13 Thu, 8 Jun 00 16:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Turning on joystick port (Anthony Skraba)
USB drive and multiboot ("Paolo Marini")
PIIIDM3 / 100Mhz FSB CPU / PC100 SDRAM running Redhat 6.2 ("Ed")
Re: Win2000 Nt Booter and Linux ("Zbigniew Sienkiewicz")
Re: Linux Install This Weekend (Dances With Crows)
Re: Need your help again... (Dances With Crows)
Re: USB drive and multiboot (Dances With Crows)
Re: IDE or SCSI for /home (Johan Kullstam)
Weird sound problem ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Athlon recomendations ("Gero H. Marten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Anthony Skraba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Turning on joystick port
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:08:37 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi there...
Hrmmm......I have a similar joystick problem (but es1371). I tried,as root,
to do the command below:
/dev/MAKEDEV js
but it errors out, and it spits back at me:
/dev/MAKEDEV: device: unknown major number for Joystick
Any help greatly appriciated!
Thanx...
Tony S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Prasanth A. Kumar" wrote:
>
>
> It may be easier to run a commonly available script to create the
> joystick device: /dev/MAKEDEV js
>
> --
> Prasanth Kumar
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Marini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: USB drive and multiboot
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 18:18:10 GMT
Hello,
I am going to buy an USB drive, probably a LaCie or Fantom Drives, and have
the following questions:
1) will I be able to use it with Linux ? which kernel version do I need ? is
there any limitation compared to an internal drive ?
2) say I define a FAT partition on the drive, can I access this when booting
from DOS (or Win95 diskette) ? ...I need this to create images with Norton
Ghost... any suggestion ?
3) I've read that it is possible to define as much as 60 logical drives in a
Linux extended partition (type 5), but what would be a nice setup for
running Win95 (or 98), Linux and QNX with the option of having also Win2000
and BeOS ? (maybe asking too much...)
4) non-Linux question: do these drives work with Win95 ? I've always found
Win98 S.E. as a requires OS...
Thanks for your help
P.
--
To reply, remove "null." from the address
------------------------------
From: "Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: PIIIDM3 / 100Mhz FSB CPU / PC100 SDRAM running Redhat 6.2
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 11:20:24 -0800
Hello,
I have heard a lot of people saying that the PIIIDM3 has some problems
running under Redhat 6.2 ( actually Kernel 2.2.15 ). I am planning to
build a new computer pretty soon and I hope to run Redhat 6.2 on it.
Will I have problems running the Supermicro PIIIDM3 with 2 100Mhz FSB
Intel 700 cpus, and 512 MB of PC100 (non ECC) SDRAM? Will I need to
use ECC RAM?
Also, are there any problems with the Adaptec AIC7892 Chipset that is
on the board. Is there currently any support for this chipset in the
current Kernel?
Any replies or comments would be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Edvin Aghanian
------------------------------
From: "Zbigniew Sienkiewicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Win2000 Nt Booter and Linux
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 11:29:39 -0700
I don't think you can install any operating system without creating a boot
sector on installed partition. You created your booting floppy by copying
Linux kernel from Linux partition to a floppy.
Why don't you try my instructions for copying a boot sector first.
Zbigniew
Tim R. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Zbigniew Sienkiewicz wrote:
>
> > Sure. Just copy a boot sector to NT and modify boot.ini to point to it.
>
> but i don't have a boot sector.
> how i boot now is with a floppy that i basicly cp bzImage /dev/fd0
> or else i use loadlin from my win95's dos
> but i recently installed nt 4 server and would like to either use its
> bootloader to boot linux, or else figure out how to use lilo to boot nt,
win95,
> and linux
>
> --Tim
>
> >
> > To copy a boot sector:
> > dd if=/dev/hda3 of=/linux.bst bs=512 count=1
> > where /dev/hda3 is your Linux partition and linux.bst is a name of the
file
> > you're creating.
> > To modify boot.ini add following line to it (after copying linux.bst to
NT):
> > C:\linux.bst="Linux"
> > Hope it helps.
> > Zbigniew
> >
> > Tim R. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I read something similor to this in a howto.
> > > I personally don't use lilo though, is there a way to get nt's
bootloader
> > > to boot a kernel image?
> > >
> > > --tim
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > That is really slick Jim. Thanks for posting!
> > > >
> > > > John.
> > > >
> > > > In article <v2LU4.2120$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Has Anyone successfully used the NT booter to boot into linux??
> > > > And can
> > > > > > anyone help me out, besides referring to the HOW-TO??
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jeff
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks in Advance!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes. I use it every day.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would install NT.
> > > > > I would then install Linux. In doing so I would install LILO into
the
> > > > > beginning of root partition, NOT into the MBR (that's where OS
Loader
> > > > > lives).
> > > > >
> > > > > I would then download Bootpart.
> > > > > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/gvollant/bootpart.htm
> > > > > Install/Uncompress.
> > > > > Tell Bootpart where the Linux partition you want to boot is. It
will
> > > > steal
> > > > > the LILO bootsect.
> > > > > You will take that bootsector BootPart generates in put it in your
OS
> > > > Loader
> > > > > configuration file (i.e. often c:\boot.ini)
> > > > >
> > > > > So typing Bootpart I get
> > > > >
> > > > > Boot Partition 2.20 for WinNT (c) 1995-98 G. Vollant
> > > > ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > > > > WEB : http://www.winimage.com and
http://www.winimage.com/bootpart.htm
> > > > > Add partition in the Windows NT Multi-boot loader
> > > > > Run "bootpart /?" for more information
> > > > >
> > > > > 0 : C:* type=6 (BIGDOS Fat16), size = 1534176 KB
> > > > > 1 : C: type=f (Win95 XInt 13 extended), size = 18474750 KB
> > > > > 2 : C: type=6 (BIGDOS Fat16), size = 2048256 KB
> > > > > 3 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 2048287 KB
> > > > > 4 : C: type=6 (BIGDOS Fat16), size = 2048256 KB
> > > > > 5 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 16065 KB
> > > > > 6 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size = 16033 KB
> > > > > 7 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 16065 KB
> > > > > 8 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size = 16033 KB
> > > > > 9 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 16065 KB
> > > > > 10 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size = 16033 KB
> > > > > 11 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 4731142 KB
> > > > > 12 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size = 4731111 KB
> > > > > 13 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 4731142 KB
> > > > > 14 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size = 4731111 KB
> > > > > 15 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 4731142 KB
> > > > > 16 : C: type=b (Win95 Fat32), size = 4731111 KB
> > > > > 17 : C: type=5 (Extended), size = 136552 KB
> > > > > 18 : C: type=82 (Linux swap), size = 136521 KB
> > > > >
> > > > > I know a million OSes I know.
> > > > > So, the partition I have RedHat on is 12. I know since I did the
> > > > install
> > > > > right? I notice these things.
> > > > >
> > > > > So the syntax of Bootpart is
> > > > > BOOTPART <part_number> <filename>
> > > > >
> > > > > I just made up a name for the file but it's not that important
other
> > > > than it
> > > > > being 8.3 filename format.
> > > > > I use bootsect.lnx
> > > > >
> > > > > So I would type
> > > > > bootpart 12 bootsect.lnx
> > > > >
> > > > > Copy that file bootsect.lnx to where boot.ini is (likely c:\)
> > > > >
> > > > > Then add an entry.
> > > > >
> > > > > My c:\boot.ini file
> > > > >
> > > > > [boot loader]
> > > > > timeout=03
> > > > > default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINNT
> > > > > [operating systems]
> > > > > multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINNT="Windows NT Workstation
> > > > Version
> > > > > 4.00"
> > > > > multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINNT="Windows NT Workstation
> > > > Version
> > > > > 4.00 [VGA mode]" /basevideo /sos
> > > > > C:\="Microsoft Windows"
> > > > >
> > > > > c:\bootsect.lnx=" RedHat Linux 6.2"
> > > > >
> > > > > You can see I have NT, Windows, and Linux as an option.
> > > > >
> > > > > Notes:
> > > > > The Windows 2000 and NT bootloaders seem to be the same.
> > > > > Bootpart can do other things too but that's for another time.
> > > > > I guess your bootsect.lnx could be located in other places but I
keep
> > > > all
> > > > > mine together on C:
> > > > > You don't need the crazy NT stuff in boot.ini for booting Linux,
just
> > > > you
> > > > > know the bootsector name and label name to display just like
> > > > dos/windows
> > > > > would do.
> > > > > There is a linux way of extracting the linux bootsector for nt
> > > > loader, but
> > > > > you would need a working linux first and bootpart seems easier
> > > > somehow.
> > > > > You should look for a type=83 partition to tell bootpart to use.
> > > > > This procedure isn't as hard as all of this email/text would
> > > > suggest. It
> > > > > takes a second to do this when you know how.
> > > > > You can have many Linux installations booted by OS Loader. Just
keep
> > > > using
> > > > > different partitions/names.
> > > > >
> > > > > A simplier example of running bootpart might be with just NT and
Linux
> > > > > installed
> > > > > 0 : C:* type=6 (BIGDOS Fat16), size = 5534176 KB
> > > > > 5 : C: type=83 (Linux native), size =2731111 KB
> > > > > 6 : C: type=82 (Linux swap), size = 136521 KB
> > > > > Of course you would want bootpart 5 bootsect.lnx
> > > > >
> > > > > Jim Ross
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > Before you buy.
> > >
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Subject: Re: Linux Install This Weekend
Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:33:00 EDT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 08:57:21 -0700, Ron Franks
<<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> shouted forth into the ether:
>I'm going to try to install RedHat Linux on an old system that I have.
>The system is a dual pentium motherboard with 100mhz cpu's with 64MB of
>RAM, a Maxtor 2GB drive, CD ROM and floppy drive. Is there anything
>else I need?
Patience, time, and a vocabulary containing obscenities :-)
>Will RedHat install recognize the dual processors?? Is
>there any preparation I need to do on the hard drive???
The dual procs will be recognized; RH installs an SMP kernel by default
even on a uniprocessor machine. Hard-drive prepping will be taken care of
during the install, using Disk Druid or whatever they're calling it now.
If this is indeed an older Pentium system, you may not be able to boot
from the CD-ROM, so use RAWRITE.EXE and write out a boot floppy just in
case. It's on the CD-ROM in the "dosutils" directory and should work from
any MS-DOS machine (even works on NT, actually...)
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows \###| You have me mixed up with more
There is no Darkness in Eternity \##| creative ways of being stupid?
But only Light too dim for us to see \#| Beer is a vegetable. WinNT
(Unless, of course, you're working with NT)\| is the study of cool. --MegaHAL
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware,de.comp.os.unix.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Need your help again...
Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:43:19 EDT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 19:56:32 +0200, Thirsty McGuinness
<<8homt6$4sa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> shouted forth into the ether:
>Thanks for answering my last question. The new one:
> I now have both ATA66-devices at the primary-channel, the two cd-drives at
> the secondary.
>Although I�m sure that the chipset goes with UDMA66, benchmarking the drives
> results in a maximum-transfer-rate of only 30MB/s.
> I switched the drives to UDMA and also tried a lot of benchmark-progr.s,
> always with the same result (or lower).
> I got a further SCSI-drive via AHA2940U-adapter, but I don�t think that got
> sth. to with it... (Why should it?)
> What could be the reason for that again?
There are a couple of potential bottlenecks when it comes to data transfer
to/from a hard drive. Bus speed is the one everybody focuses on, which is
why we have UDMA/66 everything. The rate at which data can flow off of
the HDA (head-disk-assembly) is the other one, which gets neglected a lot.
Basically, the platters aren't spinning fast enough/the heads are seeking
too much to keep up with the bus speed.
I repeat--if having the best performance is your goal, ditch IDE and buy
up some 10000 RPM SCSI drives. I think you might be able to find 10000
RPM IDE drives, but they're noisy as hell, run hot, suck power, and cost
too much for the average user. I'm surprised you managed to get 30M/s out
of a 7200 RPM IDE drive, but hey. Just don't get suckered in by the hype;
the slow mechanical disks can't keep up with the fast electronic bus and
won't be able to for a long time now that ATA/100 is coming out.
> Hope I don�t knock on your nerves,
The question? No. Posting the same article twice? er, yes.
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows \###| You have me mixed up with more
There is no Darkness in Eternity \##| creative ways of being stupid?
But only Light too dim for us to see \#| Beer is a vegetable. WinNT
(Unless, of course, you're working with NT)\| is the study of cool. --MegaHAL
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Subject: Re: USB drive and multiboot
Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:00:31 EDT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 18:18:10 GMT, Paolo Marini
<<CrR%4.144130$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> shouted forth into the ether:
>I am going to buy an USB drive, probably a LaCie or Fantom Drives, and have
>the following questions:
>1) will I be able to use it with Linux ? which kernel version do I need ? is
>there any limitation compared to an internal drive ?
You probably can use it, but you'll need the unstable kernel series as the
2.2.xx series's USB support is iffy. Kernel 2.4 will support USB
everything; maybe in a few weeks it'll be out. In the meantime, I've
found kernel 2.3.99-pre3 to be stable and fast unless you try using a
parallel-port CD. Can't say anything about USB stability there as I have
no USB peripherals nor any plans to get any right now.
You can't boot from a USB drive, and the speed will be limited.
12Mbit/sec is the max speed of USB at the moment, which works out to a
whopping 1.4M/s--half as fast as the internal drive on my old laptop.
>2) say I define a FAT partition on the drive, can I access this when booting
>from DOS (or Win95 diskette) ?
DOS doesn't support USB. Lose95 doesn't either. 98 *might*.
>3) I've read that it is possible to define as much as 60 logical drives in a
>Linux extended partition (type 5), but what would be a nice setup for
>running Win95 (or 98), Linux and QNX with the option of having also Win2000
>and BeOS ? (maybe asking too much...)
Lose2K and 98 will want primary partitions. You can install Linux on
logical partitions and should be able to do the same for BeOS, don't know
about QNX. FAT32 is the only filesystem type all these OSes can read and
write without potential problems, so keep that in mind if you need a
shared data area. I guess I'd do something like:
hda1 NTFS Lose2K C:
hda2 FAT32 Lose98 C:
hda3 extended
hda5 FAT32 (shared data area, D: or whatever)
hda6 ext2 / for Linux
hda7 QNX / for QNX
hda8 BeFS / for BeOS
hda9 swap swap for Unix-y OSes
>4) non-Linux question: do these drives work with Win95 ?
No. 95's USB support is worse than kernel 2.2.x's, as sometimes it
doesn't work at all and sometimes completely trashes everything. Don't
risk it, degrade your Lose9x install to 98.
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows \###| You have me mixed up with more
There is no Darkness in Eternity \##| creative ways of being stupid?
But only Light too dim for us to see \#| Beer is a vegetable. WinNT
(Unless, of course, you're working with NT)\| is the study of cool. --MegaHAL
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IDE or SCSI for /home
Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:39:29 -0400
Guy De Pauw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
> We want to buy a new big hard drive for one of our (Dual PII) servers.
> The new hard drive is supposed to function as the new /home partition on
> which everybody (about 10 people) can put their files. Having one big
> /home for everybody will also facilitate backups and the like.
>
> I know SCSI is better in many ways, but also way more expensive. Would
> an IDE-drive be a good solution or will it slow everything down? There
> would not have to be any swapping on this drive or anything, just plain
> old reading and writing, but some of the processes we run (Machine
> Learning of natural language) or very data-intensive.
either SCSI or EIDE (ATA) should be fine. however, if you are going
to add many drives, you may be forced into SCSI anyhow. i figure SCSI
is a must once you get up to (and beyond) 3 hard drives and a cd-rom.
--
johan kullstam l72t00052
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Weird sound problem
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 19:54:55 GMT
Okay, here's what happened: I installed Caldera 2.2 using all the
default setting, and got no sound. I've been through all their support
pages to no avail. I've got an AWE64 on a P2 400. Funny thing is
after I loaded up just about every module that seemed AWE-related, I
was able to play CDs but no .wav files and no sound in KDE. I told you
it was weird. Any ideas? Please email them as well as post them...
Thanks in advance.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Gero H. Marten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Athlon recomendations
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 21:01:20 +0200
> John in SD wrote:
>
> I have been running a BCM/GVC mobo with an early Athlon 600 since Sept 99.
> Maxtor IDE disks (3). The system is rock solid. I have RH6.1 running now.
>
> --John Coffman
>
> On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 05:01:13 +0000, Christopher Segot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Hello, I am about to upgrade my system, I am considering an athlon with
> >redhat, however on their hcl they say that the athlon may not work
> >depending on the system config. Can anybody recomend a good
> >mboard,cpu,hd combo ?
> >thanks alot.
> >
> >
> >Chris
>
> LILO version 21.4.3 (06-May-2000) source at
> ftp: sd.dynhost.com dir: /pub/linux/lilo
You obviously aren't serving a network, running apache, sendmail, inn,
junkbuster, bind, samba, etc. simultaneously. Athlons are never used
as servers, because they are not 100% i386 compatible. Remember, Linux
was written for the i386 chipset. More questions? Be advised, not to
by an Athlon if you want to do serious work under Linux. On the other
hand, if you just want to peep into Linux and otherwise use Windoze,
be happy.
--
Gero H. Marten
<http://www.provi.de/gmarten/>
--
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
