Linux-Hardware Digest #661, Volume #14 Sat, 21 Apr 01 12:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Where can I buy bridgeboards? (B'ichela)
Re: Microsoft gets hard ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft gets hard (Nils Holland)
NICs for multi-multihomed hosts ("Vik Heyndrickx")
RAID 5 or 0 for performance? (Dan Smith)
asus a7v133 ("Vik Heyndrickx")
Re: RAID 5 or 0 for performance? (Milton)
Re: RAID 5 or 0 for performance? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: 2.4.3 kernel / new aic7xxx driver problem (Bruce Garlock)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
Rackmount PC HW recs? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Any thoughts on a good Sparc Linux?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (B'ichela)
Crossposted-To: comp.periphs.scsi,comp.os.cpm,comp.sys.tandy
Subject: Re: Where can I buy bridgeboards?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 04:18:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 01:51:28 GMT, CBFalconer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hook up the MFM drive, low level format it, and then test the
>result. The 40M should become 64M, and you will have more sectors
>per track.
WEll I would if I could get the ACB-4070 to REZERO to track
Zero properly. This is the whole problem. the only two MFM units toat
are available are a SEGATE 225 and a Ancient IBM branded Miniscribe.
Being both drives bomb out.. Either its the data cable or the 20 pin
control cables or worse the board itself is faulty (I will have to
find another 20 pinner as I cannot find my spare! On the standard XT
MFM controller the ST225 formats fine. Thus it is NOT the drive itself
as my test with the Miniscribe confirms.
I just found that I left a jumper on pins N-O on the board,
according to the manaul that was supposed to handle drives that drop
the Seek Complete line during head switching. Perhaps with the other
Control Cable I found I might get lucky this time. The Data cable (the
20 pin one) is also used on the XT controller, works fine there. Thus
I doubt that cable is faulty. The original cable was a modified cable
with the connectors changed to the non-slotted 34 pin card edge type,
for the ACB-4070 does not have the slot after pins 2 and 4.
I needed a longer one so I modified a floppy cable (removed the twist)
and crimped the original Non-slotted ACB-4070 connector to it. using a
REAL IDE crimping tool.
Possibly a wire is not making contact with the Track-0 pin. Thus as I
kept hearing the drive kept slamming into the head stops. (both are
stepper motor type drives) The sound reminds me of my Commodore 1541
during a disk format! (This was the dead give away of a Track-0 or a
seek compete signal not getting to the board. AFter this happens the
drives continued to work on the XT. Therefore no immediate damage was
done to the drives. Still I really would like to find the MFM version
if possible of this board. When you are designing a driver. The best
thing is to elimate as many external varibles as possible, This allows
one to focus on the drivers themselves without worrying if the drives
have the inability to deal with the additional Data on each cylindar,
Some disks don't have the BPI to deal with this additional sector
information without read errors.
--
B'ichela
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft gets hard
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:21:20 +0200
"Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3ae0bf63$0$4544$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> My experiences competely disagree with yours. I run Ghost and install from
> an image onto a new hardrive. W2K boots up, detects all the hardware and
> uses DHCP to get on the net. I change the machine name and on it goes.
Then
> it runs and runs and runs... 99.99% uptime is effortless and considered
our
> norm. Much more commonly the ONLY reboots occur for hardware related
issues
> or hotfixes that require a (planned) reboot. We've never had a W2K crash.
*Are* there hotfixes that don't require reboot?
------------------------------
From: Nils Holland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft gets hard
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:04:10 +0200
unicat wrote:
> (The folowing are the editorial opinions of the author,
> no more no less...)
>
> I recenly saw rumors on some internet chat pages that Linux hackers are
> already
> porting Linux, and Apache, to the Microsoft X-box using Xbox developers
> kits....
You didn't read that on April 1st, when even the KDE folks "announced" that
they and Troll Tech would base the next version of KDE / QT on Mozilla and
Java-Script technology? And after all, you said yourself that the
Linux/Xbox stuff were rumors. In fact, some time before the official
release of the Playstation 2, some German computer magazine wrote that that
machine would be totally Linux-based. Now that it's there, I don't think
this is true, however.
Anyway, I don't think you are totally right in your original message. You
said Windows is dead. I don't think so. Enough fools, including big
companies, see Windows as the ultimate operating system, and they buy any
new version of it, leaving Microsoft with a big market. If Windows was
dead, I believe Microsoft would be dead too! In the past, Microsoft was
probably able to do some strange business strategies, but that was only
possible because they were (and are) the leaders in a certain field (namely
the field of the OS-market). However, I think they don't have much besides
their OS (maybe their office package, but not much more). And, according to
how I see the situation, I don't think that Microsoft will be able to
successfuly enter other markets and simply kill the companies that have
been in these markets for long. No, the days when such things were possible
are over.
Personally, I don't care much about video game systems, but I cannot
imagine that Microsoft's XBox will suceed. There are enough gaming machines
out there, and even Sega, who had been in there for long, had to stop
making hardware. It's a good question if under such circumstances our
friends in Redmond should, as a kind of start-up project, enter the market
of video gaming hardware.
And after all, Microsoft definately won't sell the XBox as a Linux-machine.
They have Windows, and it's not yet time to sacrifice Windows. Their
strategy is as follows: In case the Playstation 2 should ever be able to
run Office apps, have something handy that is similar to the PS2 and that
can compete with it! This doesn't have anything to do with Linux.
In the end, it all comes down to the following: Due to the basic rights
each human being has, and due to our nice little GPL, we, as users and
developers or whatever, have the choice which software to run on which
hardware. I know for sure that I will neither run Linux on an XBox, nor
will I run any Microsoft software on my Linux-system. That's my right. I
can use all the free software out there in whatever way I want, and I can
customize my computer the way I want. With Microsoft software, I cannot
really use it the way I want to, but I can at least decide if I want to use
it or not. Everyone out there has the same choice, so if you don't want to
use Microsoft, do as I do and don't use it. Don't worry about any of their
future projects, you simply don't have to use them. I don't think that any
longer Microsoft can make *your* decisions for *you*.
(Note, dear Windows fans, that the last paragraph was not written to insult
you. I only wrote it because numerous folks out there have claimed to be
"dependant on Microsoft", and that Microsoft's goal is to make you depend
on them. I don't see this, because, as I said above, everybody can choose
freely whether or to use not to use MS products.)
Greetings,
Nils
------------------------------
From: "Vik Heyndrickx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: NICs for multi-multihomed hosts
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:12:36 GMT
Hi,
I want to implement an i386-architecture firewall/router with at least 8
FastEthernet network Interfaces (10/100 or 100 Mbps) with a 2.4 kernel. This
should be hardware which fits in an off-the-shelf standard PC. Anyone any
experience with some piece of such hardware?
Thanks,
--
Vik
------------------------------
From: Dan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: RAID 5 or 0 for performance?
Date: 20 Apr 2001 18:55:39 -0400
I have 5 40MB/s SCSI drives (4GB each). I want maximum performance,
and am not worried about redundancy. Should I use RAID 5 or 0? I'd
rather not lose the extra 4GB to RAID 5, but if it would be faster or
better, then I'd do it.
Using software raid under linux 2.2.
Thanks!
--Dan
------------------------------
From: "Vik Heyndrickx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: asus a7v133
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:19:51 GMT
Howdy,
A week ago I bought an asus a7v133. Great mobo. This mobo has a Promise
RAID0 controller on-board (next to a VIA IDE controller). Did anyone succeed
getting this RAID0 to work? I know I could use software RAID, but I want
also to install another OS on this same machine, so I'd prefer to have this
controller to do the work. (BTW I haven't tried it myself. I'm waiting to
buy two 40 GB 7200 rpm HD's until I know it is useful).
Thanks.
--
Vik
------------------------------
From: Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: RAID 5 or 0 for performance?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 08:24:22 -0400
On 20 Apr 2001 18:55:39 -0400, Dan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have 5 40MB/s SCSI drives (4GB each). I want maximum performance,
>and am not worried about redundancy. Should I use RAID 5 or 0? I'd
>rather not lose the extra 4GB to RAID 5, but if it would be faster or
>better, then I'd do it.
RAID 0
--
���������������������������������������������������
Milton B. Hewitt
CAUCE Member - http://www.cauce.org
Proud supporter of the Microsoft Boycott Campaign
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/
���������������������������������������������������
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: RAID 5 or 0 for performance?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:01:53 +0200
In comp.os.linux.misc Dan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have 5 40MB/s SCSI drives (4GB each). I want maximum performance,
> and am not worried about redundancy. Should I use RAID 5 or 0? I'd
Raid 0, as the software raid howto says!
> rather not lose the extra 4GB to RAID 5, but if it would be faster or
> better, then I'd do it.
Look at the fine explanation in the howto.
> Using software raid under linux 2.2.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Bruce Garlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2.4.3 kernel / new aic7xxx driver problem
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:58:51 -0400
Trevor Hemsley wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:35:58, Bruce Garlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ok, Just for the heck of it, I backed up my current /usr/src/linux directory, and
> > tar'ed off a fresh 2.4.3. I then copied the patch for 6.1.11 into the
> > /usr/src/linux directory. I went into the directory, and typed 'patch -p1 <
> > linux-aic7xxx-6.1.11-2.4.3.patch, and I got all sorts of "Hunks Failed" messages
> > (all of them, actually).
>
> That's what 'patch --dry-run' is for ;-)
>
> --
> Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks, Trevor - I'll make a note of that switch.
Bruce
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:16:13 GMT
Monte Milanuk wrote:
>
> Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Man..that ladder logic is the wierdest way to program I've ever seen.
> > If you have never used it, it would seem strange. But just think, there
> > was automatic code generation before PCs. You can draw a diagram on your
> > display, and it starts running. The VM reads a line of the drawing and
> > executes it. Sort of like having a VM read a UML diagram and run the
> > code.
>
> As an ex-motor control electrician in a large steel mill, I have to agree.
> Ladder logic makes a lot of sense if you are trained in how to troubleshoot
> using electrical prints. Plus, the dirty little secret of PLC's and ladder
> logic programming as far as I'm concered is that it is dirt easy to bypass
> and circumvent failed field devices. No physical rewiring required. W/ a
> PLC and ladder logic, it's pretty easy to figure out where you need to
> modify things, and how. But to do the same w/ a regular programming
> language... maybe for a professional programmer it might be simple, but not
> for most technicians, I think. Not that tech's are stupid, just it's not a
> normal way of thinking for them. That, and most people that proficient at
> programming seem rather adverse to getting dirty on a regular basis ;p
>
> Monte
A good project for Linux open source would be a ladder logic
development/run-time enviornment. It should have provisions for
constructing and printing ladder diagrams. It should have a runtime
enviornment that intreprets the diagram routing signals to/from the
external hardware. For emergency situations, it should have provisions
for over-riding the state of objects (password required).
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 14:30:09 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Mind you, I can't vouch for the accuracy of that report. But is was
> > offered as proof that the crash wasn't the fault of the OS. "It was a
> > misbehaving application that caused the OS to crash." The Navy had to
> > clear the OS or justify to congress why it insisted on MS when most
> > contractors were saying it couldn't (or shouldn't) be done. The
> > contractor had to clear the OS because he promised that it could be
> > done. But he was late, and the Navy had to either cancel a test at a
> > loss of millions, or go to test with a beta version. So the vendor says
> > "we were only a little late, if they had just waited a few more days".
>
> This is all completely untrue.
>
> Read all the info collected by Jerry Pournelle on the issue
> http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/Yorktown.html
>
> The contractor in question also stated specifically that the navy had gone
> against their recomendation of installing newer software that didn't have
> the problem PRIOR to the event.
> http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html
>
> "... the fault was with certain applications that were developed by CAE
> Electronics in Leesburg, Va. As Harvey McKelvey, former director of navy
> programs for CAE, admits, "If you want to put a stick in anybody's eye, it
> should be in ours." But McKelvey adds that the crash would not have happened
> if the navy had been using a production version of the CAE software, which
> he asserts has safeguards to prevent the type of failure that occurred. "
>
> You should also read the original article which is the source of all this:
> http://www.usni.org/Proceedings/digiorgio.htm
>
> Notice that in an article of great length, only 2 paragraphs are devoted to
> NT, and none of the say the OS crashed.
>
> Further, the same author that wrote the gcn article (which quotes from the
> usni article) also clarifies his statements in a followup article:
> http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/november9/6.htm
That last one is even worse than my story. A divide by zero in the
controller for a fuel valve caused the entire LAN to go down crashing 27
remotes? Industry (mostly) fixed that problem 30 years ago. For what its
worth, I had an NT machine I was working with bring down an entire LAN
of over 1000 machines. It was called the "ping of death". Some
applications could cause the NT software to start issuing network pings
at high speed. These faults often also caused a BSOD, but not always.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Rackmount PC HW recs?
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 16:40:04 GMT
Hello ...
I was looking to put together a rackmounted PC (Preferably 1U), and was
looking to get some recomendations on hardware to use.
Basically, this is what I'm looking for (end result):
1U Rackmount, standard PC hardware (I'm going to be running either one of
the BSD's or Linux on it, and odn't want to have to worry about support),
686 class processor or higher, preferably a CPU that can run fanless (w/
a generous but not monstrous heatsink), either EDO or SDRAM (I have extra
of either, so that is irrelevant), IDE HD (I have extras here as well),
and it would be nice if the base noise level of the unit (power supply
fan, et al) was fairly low.
As I said, I have extra EDO and SDRAM (PC-100) so either situation is fine.
Also, I already have the HD.
What I'm looking for would either be pieces or a bare bones rackmount unit
that would utilize a mobo/CPU combination to my description above. I have
a socket360 Celeron 366 that works w/o a fan, so if the motherboard was
a socket360 (or the socketed celerons, as I have a slocket) that would be
great.
Other parts I have laying about that would be useful to be able to
utilize, but unecessary (as it wouldn't cost much to replace them) are
a PCI video card (original Matrox Millenium) and an ISA 10bT network
card (3com 509B). On board video and network are fine as long as they're
well supported by a variety of OS's.
If you have any ideas, please let me know :) Thanks in advance.
--
Jeff Gentry [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SEX DRUGS UNIX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Any thoughts on a good Sparc Linux?
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 16:02:04 GMT
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 05:31:15 GMT, Jonadab the Unsightly One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Yung) wrote:
>
>> X is very slow with 16M of ram.
>
>Veritably. 16M of RAM you *can* run X, and I have, but it takes
...
BTW: there's a place out here in denver selling used stuff and in their latest
ad, they had sparc 5's w/ 32M ram and a 1 GB drive for $120.
E-mail me if you want the address/name.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.hardware.
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
******************************
