Linux-Hardware Digest #363, Volume #13 Sat, 5 Aug 00 23:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: question about install in amd duron 600 ("Robert M. Stockmann")
Re: HELP! - "mount: /dev/cdrom is not a valid block device" (Glitch)
Re: Almost Lost New Hard Drive When Trying To Install Mandrake 7.0 ("Robert M.
Stockmann")
Re: What about Rockwell HCF 56k Data fax speakerphone PCI modem (Glitch)
Q: What software and switches do I need to multihead? (this is not a rude question)
("Mark Tigwell")
Q: Voodoo3 AGP won't run in XFree 4.n.n ("Mark Tigwell")
Re: New/Followup ? Re: 20.4GB HD, bios limitation, EZ-drive or any (Chris Jackson)
Re: Dual processor board? ("D. Stimits")
Re: What software and switches do I need to multihead? (this is not a rude question)
("Christian Studer")
Setting up RAID-1 with existing file systems. (Dances with Turtles)
Re: need dual-scsi-controller (Juergen Pfann)
Inexpensive IR or Ethernet Laser Printers ("Joseph C. Kopec")
Power Line Isolation via Ethernet Connections? (mike)
Re: New/Followup ? Re: 20.4GB HD, bios limitation, EZ-drive or any other?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Power Line Isolation via Ethernet Connections? (Dances With Crows)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert M. Stockmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: question about install in amd duron 600
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:22:22 +0200
ideal wrote:
>
> I install redhat6.2 on my machine.After it is installed on my machine,I
> reboot my machine.but when booting it report such error:
> Disable CPUID serail....error
> who can tell me what's wrong.
> Thank u very much.
> pls reply to me email box :[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yep same story here with my AMD Athlon Thinderbird 800 machine.
Boot with the redhat 6.2 cdrom and choose linux rescue to start.
mount your root / filesystem on /mnt :
mount /dev/hda1 /mnt
then do a chroot /mnt and edit lilo.conf and put a entry
inside for vmlinuz-2.2.14-5.0.14BOOT to boot. run lilo.
next boot with the vmlinuz-2.2.14-5.0.14BOOT kernel, and build
a new kernel and switchoff Disable CPUID serial inside the
kernel configuration (make menuconfig)
Robert
--
++---------------------++---------------------------------++
|| R.M. Stockmann || InfoMagic Nederland VOF ||
|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] || Unix administration & support ||
++---------------------++---------------------------------++
Linux: A copylefted Unix-like operating system for several platforms :
http://perso.wanadoo.es/xose/linux/linux_ports.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:45:51 -0400
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP! - "mount: /dev/cdrom is not a valid block device"
I believe this usually means that Linux doesn't know the drive exists
therefore doesn't think that hdc is a device causing the error. Are you
sure that Linux realizes you have a cdrw and that it is indeed on hdc?
The best way to tell is to look at the messages at boot time to see what
all drives Linux finds; you might also be able to see in
/var/log/messages or try issuing the command 'dmesg' at the prompt.
HTH
Brandon
Toby Hobson wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Could anybody help someone new to linux?
>
> When I try to mount /dev/cdrom I get "mount: /dev/cdrom is not a valid
> block device"
>
> I have 2 hard disks, /dev/hda and /dev/hdb and 2 cdroms: a DVD on
> /dev/cdrom2 (/dev/hdd) and a CDRW on dev/cdrom (/dev/hdc I think).
>
> I can mount /dev/cdrom2 with no trouble but dev/cdrom is not working
> if I try "mount -t iso9660 /dev/hdc /mnt/cdrom" I get the same error
> message.
>
> can anybody offer any advice
>
> Many thanks
>
> Toby
------------------------------
From: "Robert M. Stockmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Almost Lost New Hard Drive When Trying To Install Mandrake 7.0
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:42:37 +0200
mike wrote:
>
> Hi,
> the problem may be due to the basic hardware and bios
> configuration, but it happened after an install of Mandrake 7.0
> I just installed a 20 gb hard drive in my old pentium 166 system,
> 80 mb memory. The bios only recognized about 8 gb so I
> assumed that I could put Windows on the 8 gb and then
> proceed to install different versions of Linux on the rest of
> the drive. I installed Win95 and then Mandrake 7.0. The
> installation went without hitches. When rebooted the
> system, I got "LI" and lots of zeros.
> During the install of Mandrake, I made a seperate /boot
> partition of 7 mb below the 1024 cylinders. It was very close
> as it complained with 8 mb. Win95 would not boot either.
> I removed the "linear" switch in lilo.conf and Mandrake booted.
> Win95 still wouldn't boot.
> I figured that I would regenerate the MBR via fdisk /mbr.
> What happened was very disturbing. My Win95 boot floppy
> would not boot, but the Linux boot floppy would boot.
> I tried to regenerate the MBR by doing Lilo - u , which I believe
> is supposed to do it, but it didn't.
> The next step that I thought of was to make the new drive
> a slave and put my old 6.4 gb Win95 drive as master. I figured
> that I could somehow repair the drive with a bootable Win95
> system. My old drive wouldn't boot either.
> I decided that the only possibility would be to try to fix the
> hard drive through Mandrake. I did fdisk -o, which put a
> DOS partition on the hard drive. After I did it, I was able
> to boot my Win95 floppy. I did fdisk / mbr and it did not
> regenerate the C: drive. I used Partition Magic and deleted
> the existing Win95 partitions and then used fdisk again.
> I then tried to transfer the Windows DOS with sys c:
> and it said system transferred, but it wouldn't boot. Then
> I did format c:/s and I got a message "not enough memory
> to load system." Then I did just plain format c: and it formatted
> the c: drive without the system. Again, I did sys c: and the message
> was "system transferred", but again it didn't boot and said "
> missing operating system".
> Finally I did format c:/s again and it said "system transferred"
> and it actually worked.
> This was the most frustrating time I ever had with a computer.
> I can't understand why a change on the MBR of a hard drive
> would prevent a DOS boot floppy from booting. I thought
> that if the bios was set for A,C booting that the floppy would
> take priority independently from the hard drive, whether it
> was bootable or not or not even there, but it seems that what
> probably happened was that the boot process somehow still
> needs some sort of confirmation from the hard drive. I
> wish I had a handle on what happened because I never want
> it to happen again.
> Does anyone know why it happened and how I can setup
> my present hardware to do what I origionally wanted it to do?
use the latest version of lilo. the latest lilo doesn't have
the 1024 cylinder limit anymore.
regards
Robert
--
++---------------------++---------------------------------++
|| R.M. Stockmann || InfoMagic Nederland VOF ||
|| [EMAIL PROTECTED] || Unix administration & support ||
++---------------------++---------------------------------++
Linux: A copylefted Unix-like operating system for several platforms :
http://perso.wanadoo.es/xose/linux/linux_ports.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:47:52 -0400
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What about Rockwell HCF 56k Data fax speakerphone PCI modem
unless it has a lucent chip and therefore would possibly work with the
ltmodem.o driver then it won't work in Linux. You can thank the
manufacturer for that.
ino wrote:
>
> Will this work on Linux?
> i got Red Hat 6.0
> it's on com3 (/dev/ttyS2)
------------------------------
From: "Mark Tigwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
3dfx.glide.linux,apana.lists.os.linux.x11,comp.os.linux.x,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.i386unix,linux.dev.x11,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Q: What software and switches do I need to multihead? (this is not a rude
question)
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 10:53:18 +1000
** Reply by E-mail appreciated :) **
I have acquired XFree86 4.0.1 and I understand how to set-up my XF86Config
file to run multihead.
1. My question is, what else do I need to run multihead? I have GNOME (a
recent version that comes with RH6.2) and Enlightenment 0.15.n. Will that do
it? or do I need to update these?
2. What switches do I need to add (other than startx -- +xinerama) to the
window manager configs to make the xxxxinerama aware and where do I put 'em?
3. Would I be better off running Sawmill than Enlightenment?
Thanks, I love you all
Mark Tigwell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.zipworld.com.au/~tigs/images/
------------------------------
From: "Mark Tigwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
3dfx.glide.linux,apana.lists.os.linux.x11,comp.os.linux.x,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.i386unix,linux.dev.x11,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Q: Voodoo3 AGP won't run in XFree 4.n.n
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 10:53:31 +1000
** Reply by E-mail appreciated :) **
Fellow Penguineers,
I have a system with 2 Voodoo3 2000 video cards (one AGP and one PCI). I
bought them both because I knew the PCI Voodoo3 works great in XFree and I
figured if I was going to multihead, getting an AGP card with exactly the
same chip would probably be wise. Maybe not. I can't get the AGP card to
work in XFree 4.n either using it by itself or with the PCI card. The PCI
card works a treat by itself. It seems to TRY and initialise (you can hear
it start up) and there is a signal to the screen because it comes on and
changes color, but nothing appears and the system hangs. Cannot be rebooted
via ctl+alt+bcksp or even a warm reboot when using the AGP card. I have
tried cranking it right down to 640x480x8, no use either. Just have to hit
the hard reset button (ouch). Help me. I don't want to admit to my friends
that Linux can crash.
Cheers,
Mark Tigwell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.zipworld.com.au/~tigs/images/
------------------------------
From: Chris Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: New/Followup ? Re: 20.4GB HD, bios limitation, EZ-drive or any
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:32:09 GMT
Instead of spending heaps of cash on a new hard drive, why not get a more
modern motherboard, or finding new bios updates for the Aptiva? In cases
like yours, I just use a boot disk and forget about lilo.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am preparing to install Mandrake 7.1 on a 1996 Aptiva with the 8.4 GB
> BIOS limit. This machine currently has a 10.4 GB Maxtor HD and is
> using EZ-BIOS/Drive to get past the 8.4 limit. Running Windows 98 SE.
>
> One of the Mandrake manuals says that the 8.4 limit is not a problem
> for Linux as Linux does not use the BIOS for disk access. This thread
> would seem to indicate that such is not the case.
>
> I am concerned about the interaction of EZ-BIOS with Linux partitions
> and/or boot managers such as lilo or grub. Because of this, I am
> already considering buying a new second hard drive (discarding the
> original 1.2 GB one) and devoting it soley to Linux. Then, Windoze can
> continue to use EZ-BIOS/Drive on the 10.4 GB drive while Linux gets a
> clean slate on the new drive.
>
> I thought I had reached a good solution. However, I don't want to buy
> that drive to find I face the same 8.4 GB limit on it and the same
> questions about Linux's interaction with EZ-BIOS/Drive.
>
> I've been reading around but have not yet found anything clear or
> definitive about EZ-BIOS/Drive. And now I am also questioning the
> information on the 8.4 BIOS limit.
>
> Also, even if my separate drives plan would work, could I make the
> Linux drive the primary IDE drive, complete with boot manager, and have
> that boot manager find/boot the Windoze boot partition on the secondary
> IDE drive when that drive is formatted with EZ-BIOS/Drive?
>
> Any pointers, experience, or the like would be appreciated. TIA.
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> > still can not get more than 8.4 gb. This howto says that linux can
> > bypass the bios settings, but it didn't or I missed something.
> >
> > Is there any other way to get the 20.4 gb from this harddrive?
> > Should I install EZ-Drive software that comes from maxtor? Will this
> > screw up the things?
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 19:37:49 -0600
From: "D. Stimits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dual processor board?
Chris Rankin wrote:
>
> "D. Stimits" wrote:
> > FYI, the APICs on SuperMicro i840 chipset boards are incompatible with
> > linux (SuperMicro has dropped all linux support on the issue). If you
> > are interested in what the APIC does, see the Documentation subdirectory
> > of the kernel source, file IO-APIC.txt
>
> Well isn't that just wonderful. I have recently bought a Supermicro
> PIIIDME (i840) motherboard, and have noticed that the kernel complains 3
> times during the APIC initialisation. Everything *seems* to work though,
> (apart from the sound, which I haven't worked too hard on yet). However,
> even if Supermicro have thrown in the towel, surely the hardware can be
> made to work under Linux if the hardware works at all.
>
> Chris
Your immediate solution is that you boot with kernel option "noapic".
You can add this to lilo, or you can, during lilo prompt, append it to
your boot choice, e.g., if you have a choice "2.2.16" then choose
"2.2.16 noapic". What this does is disallow irq steering to the 2nd cpu.
If cpu #0 is in use, then io is blocked or degraded. Under heavy load,
the system will become just as unresponsive as windows under heavy load
on a single cpu. It is, however, rock solid, and threaded apps still use
both cpu's. During this, you will also find some of the pci devices may
be at a new irq (for me it was a modem that used to be at irq 17). FYI,
I have seen reports of this problem from other PIIIDME owners, I
personally found it on a PIIIDM3.
I have personally talked on the phone for hours with SuperMicro, and
they are simply not interested. They can only quote that it is stable
under NT (which isn't entirely true, but that probably isn't the mobo
problem). I don't know who to ask about supporting this, since
SuperMicro won't even provide information, but possibly Intel is the
next choice, since they have their hopes into both the chipset and
linux. But consider SuperMicro a non-linux-compatible source from now on
(at least for newer chipsets like i840).
------------------------------
From: "Christian Studer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
3dfx.glide.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.i386unix,linux.dev.x11,linux.redhat.install
Subject: Re: What software and switches do I need to multihead? (this is not a rude
question)
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 03:55:14 +0200
You need to get a later version of Enlightenment, at least 0.16.4-2:
ftp://ftp.enlightenment.org/pub/enlightenment/enlightenment/xinerama-awa
re/. If GNOME makes any problems, switch to using Enlightenment by
itself.
See my article on Linux multimon for more information:
http://www.realtimesoft.com/multimon/linux/.
Christian Studer
http://www.realtimesoft.com
"Mark Tigwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8micqo$1va$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ** Reply by E-mail appreciated :) **
>
> I have acquired XFree86 4.0.1 and I understand how to set-up my
XF86Config
> file to run multihead.
>
> 1. My question is, what else do I need to run multihead? I have GNOME
(a
> recent version that comes with RH6.2) and Enlightenment 0.15.n. Will
that do
> it? or do I need to update these?
>
> 2. What switches do I need to add (other than startx -- +xinerama) to
the
> window manager configs to make the xxxxinerama aware and where do I
put 'em?
>
> 3. Would I be better off running Sawmill than Enlightenment?
>
> Thanks, I love you all
>
> Mark Tigwell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.zipworld.com.au/~tigs/images/
------------------------------
From: Dances with Turtles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Setting up RAID-1 with existing file systems.
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:01:30 -0400
I have a system up and running and I want to add software raid-1 without
blowing away my partitions. I think
that somebody posted a solution a few months back on how to make you
existing partitions raid-able, without
lossing data.
Anyone have an answer? Something to do with an entry in the
/etc/raidtab, I think.
TIA.
------------------------------
From: Juergen Pfann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: need dual-scsi-controller
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:25:31 +0200
peter pilsl wrote:
>
> cause we run out of pci-slots we need to combine out LVD-drives and our
> standard-scsi-drivers (cdrom, streamer) to one controller.
> I�ve heard the adaptec29160 can do this, but I think it is not supported
> under 2.2.x-kernels.
>
> Any other controller that is supported in linux ?
> thanx,
>
> peter
>
I'd warmly recommend the LSILogic SYM21002, which seems to fulfill
EXACTLY your needs - as it consists of one channel dedicated to
"legacy" U/UW devices and one LVD U2W (not U160); that is *true*
2 channels, 2 scsi host busses, (unfortunately) 2 IRQs, too - unlike
the Adaptec you mentioned that has a SCSI-SCSI bridge, so you have
only _one_ SCSI bus still ! The same constraint applies to the
Tekram 390 U2W resp. U3W - each are in fact single channel HAs, even
though you *can* attach SE and LVD devices separately.
In terms of prices, you might know that Adaptec really can compete
only if you compare the naked HAs to Symbios or Tekram with full SW
& cable kit - to get some ideas, Tekram 390 U2W is ~ 2800 ATS, SYM21002
no more than 3500 (but that's real dual-channel!), whereas the not yet
mentioned SYM 22910 (Dual U2W) or 21040 (Dual U160) will be _much_
more expensive. The big price difference between 21002 and 22910 is IMHO
due to the fact that 21002 has only 1 U-Narrow (50 pin) external
connector (for the "legacy" channel A), but 22910 2 68 pin LVD external
conn. - that's exactly the reason for me to buy the 21002, in order
to attach my scanner without the need of 68-50 adaptor.
The Linux software support for the LSI/SYM host adapters and their chips
is *superb* IMHO, even for 2.0.x kernels, and the whole family of chips
up to the 53c1010 U-160 will work fine, be they on genuine Symbios HAs
or Tekram, Asus etc.
So, as a resume, if you stay on the carpet and say 80 MB/s theor.
transfer
rate is o.k., you might easily come to the same conclusion as I did :
cost-/benefit ratio seems to look best for the SYM 210002.
Juergen
------------------------------
From: "Joseph C. Kopec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.laptops,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Inexpensive IR or Ethernet Laser Printers
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:28:42 GMT
I am in the market for a new laser printer, my 8 year old HP IIIP having
died. I am interested in a laser printer that is either networkable or
that has an IR port, as I have a laptop and several destops that I would
like to be able to print from and I would like to avoid having to either
(i) boot up the desktop that would be attached to the printer or (ii)
fiddle with parallel port cables. Additionally, I would mostly be
running Linux. I would not be a particularly high-volume user and 6 or
8 ppm is sufficient for my needs.
The cheapest IR-ready laser printer I have come across is an HP 2100SE,
which runs about $700. The higher end 2100TN is network-ready, but runs
$1100. I was hoping to spend no more than $400, which is about what an
HP 1100SE would run. I believe I may be able to get an Ethernet add-on
for the 1100SE for somewhere between $70 and $150 (I forget).
Additionally, I have seen low-end Brother and NEC laser printers for
about $300. I have heard an Ethernet print server is available from one
of the network card companies (DLink?) for $70-$100 and I seem to recall
hearing about add-on IR ports (along the lines of what some IR keyboards
use).
With all this in mind, I would appreciate any thoughts as to the
cheapest route to having Ethernet and/or IR connectivity to a laser
printer. Thanks in advance.
------------------------------
From: mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Power Line Isolation via Ethernet Connections?
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:30:46 -0400
Hi,
I was wondering if there is any power line isolation from
ethernet connected computers. Example: Let's say that
a building is wired for 120 and 240 volts ac. Some areas might
have the 120 volt line tapped off one side of the center tapped
240 volt transformer and other areas might have their
computers plugged in to the other side of the 240 volt
center tapped transformer. Thus there could be the possibility
that by connecting an ethernet cable between the two computers
that there could be a 240 volt potential difference between
both of them if there were faulty grounding / wiring.
My question is whether there is any isolation in the ethernet
signal that would prevent dangerous current flowing between
the two distant computers?
Mike
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: New/Followup ? Re: 20.4GB HD, bios limitation, EZ-drive or any other?
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:30:35 GMT
I'm working toward the day I buy a whole new box -- maybe a nice Athlon-
based system, custom-built or from a reputable dealer.
In the meantime, I'd like to play a bit more with the present piece of
kruft. Unfortunately, it's a non-standard MB design having the cards
riding on a riser card/mini-board. I've read that most replacements
won't fit into such a configuration.
And IBM made its last BIOS update in 2/99 and chose not to address the
8.4 GB barrier. I've read about picking up a Mr. BIOS or similar and
wedging it into place, but I've seen nothing that makes me comfortable
with the procedure where the BIOS is not one specifically designed for
the configuration at hand. People pull it off... sometimes.
Following search results on deja, I found in comp.sys.be.misc a post
describing the Promise Technology "ULTRA 66 PCI EIDE CONTROLLER
66MB/SEC ULTRA-DMA/66 ATAPI DEVICES" with a link to its page at buy.com
http://www.us.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=10023443&loc=101
For $23 plus shipping, you get a PCI card with replacement IDE
interfaces supporting ATA-66 and having some sort of BIOS replacement
to circumvent the limitations of an older MB BIOS.
What I'd like to do is play with the system I have while I accumulate
some more cash for a new system. After buying that system, I hope the
old one would have enough oomph to serve as a backup system and/or in
some server capacities in a home network.
I probably need someone to burst my bubble and slap me upside the
head. In lieu thereof, any experience with these replacement IDE cards?
I'm also mentioning it in case it interests anyone else in this
thread. I have no interest in buy.com; it's just what the other post
pointed to.
By the way, it may not have been the Mandrake manuals that refered to
Linux bypassing the BIOS for hard drive access. I've been reading many
things and now think it might have been the Large Drive HOWTO. Well, I
saw it somewhere.
TIA for any comments. Good luck to the others here.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instead of spending heaps of cash on a new hard drive, why not get a
more
> modern motherboard, or finding new bios updates for the Aptiva? In
cases
> like yours, I just use a boot disk and forget about lilo.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dances With Crows)
Subject: Re: Power Line Isolation via Ethernet Connections?
Date: 6 Aug 2000 03:08:40 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:30:46 -0400, mike wrote:
> I was wondering if there is any power line isolation from
>ethernet connected computers. Example: Let's say that a building is
>wired for 120 and 240 volts ac. Some areas might have the 120 volt line
>tapped off one side of the center tapped 240 volt transformer and other
>areas might have their computers plugged in to the other side of the
>240 volt center tapped transformer. Thus there could be the possibility
>that by connecting an ethernet cable between the two computers that
>there could be a 240 volt potential difference between both of them if
>there were faulty grounding / wiring. My question is whether there is
>any isolation in the ethernet signal that would prevent dangerous
>current flowing between the two distant computers?
Ethernet cabling is supposed to be isolated from the standard {120,240}
volt wiring used in electrical wiring, unless someone's put an
Etherkiller into the network somewhere.
Faulty grounding/wiring falls into the "That's a *hardware* problem"
category.
--
Matt G|There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
Brainbench MVP for Linux Admin / Tyranny is always better organized
http://www.brainbench.com / than freedom.
=============================/ ==Charles Peguy
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
