Linux-Hardware Digest #679, Volume #14 Tue, 24 Apr 01 11:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Radeon 64mb ddr under linux ("Helmut Steinwender")
Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX (Helmut Haefner)
Re: Networking -- switches vs hubs ?? (Eric P. McCoy)
Re: SUSE 7.1 - SCSI ("Jason G")
Re: Switchboxes for keyboard, mice, video? (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Modem trouble (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Modem trouble (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: today's harddrives will surely fail before dialup users manage to fill them up?
(Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Modem trouble (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Two more hardware install problems (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Modem trouble (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX (Archisman Rudra)
Re: Modem trouble (Dougie Richardson)
Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX (Dougie Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Helmut Steinwender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Radeon 64mb ddr under linux
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:10:28 GMT
I have a Radeon and it works under SuSe and Mandrake, I don't know about
redhat. No 3D acceleration, though!
"Snowman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:09eF6.4189$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi,
> I find myself in the market for a new video card, and I'm considering
> the ATI radeon 64Mb ddr with video in/out. Anyone know if it'll run under
> linux, and more specifically if it'll be much hassle to set up under RH
7.1,
> Xfree86 4.0.3?
>
> Regards,
> Snowman
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Helmut Haefner)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:26:28 GMT
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 17:16:58 GMT, "Salim Douba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>This is how the partition table looks like:
>
>Command (m for help): p
>
>Disk /dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 524 cylinders
>Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes
>
> Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
>/dev/hda1 * 1 181 1453851 83 Linux
>/dev/hda2 182 199 144585 82 Linux swap
>/dev/hda3 200 523 2602530 7 HPFS/NTFS
>
>Please note that the disk was intended for dual boot wint Windows NT.
>However, even when I tried LINUX only i had the same results.
>
>Salim
did you boot in Win NT before this failure happened. I know that there
is an recomendation of using the Win NT bootloader to make a
Linux/WinNT System. I think it could be because Win NT tries to
"repair" the MBR which won't be good for LILO.
Greetings Helmut
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Networking -- switches vs hubs ??
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric P. McCoy)
Date: 24 Apr 2001 10:21:40 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martha H Adams) writes:
> I've just picked up some hardware for making a network, and reading in the
> accompanying manuals, I see "switches" and "hubs" in a baseT network are
> either same thing for practical purposes -- or different; and I can't guess
> which out of the manuals.
The short answer is that hubs share bandwidth, whereas switches have
dedicated bandwidth for each port. On a hub, the sum bandwidth of all
ports cannot exceed the port speed - meaning that if one computer is
sending out 8Mb/s, the other can only send at 2Mb/s (on a 10BT hub).
On a switch, each port can operate at maximum speed simultaneously,
assuming the backplane is good enough to handle it. So on a 10BT
switch, all computers can be pushing out 10Mb/s at once.
The simple reason for this is that hubs broadcast all data, whereas
switches are smarter and only broadcast some. If you have, say, 8
computers on a hub, any adapter in promiscuous mode can monitor _all_
traffic on the hub, no matter where it's going. On a switch, this is
(generally) not the case.
--
Eric McCoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Knowing that a lot of people across the world with Geocities sites
absolutely despise me is about the only thing that can add a positive
spin to this situation." - Something Awful, 1/11/2001
------------------------------
From: "Jason G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SUSE 7.1 - SCSI
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:36:37 -0700
Use the module disk to load your scsi card module.
Gunnar Haaland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have problem to boot my SuSE 7.1, YaST are trying to start, but it
> complain over my SCSI, and after 8 min it start, but when it starts, I
> can`t use my Plextor SCSI cd rom and HP 9210 SCSI burner. It will only
> accept my ide cd rom.
> Any help?
>
> Gunnar
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Subject: Re: Switchboxes for keyboard, mice, video?
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:05 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith R. Williams) wrote:
> Well, since QWERTY was *designed* to limit typing speed...
Sort of. IIUC it was designed to prevent typewriters
from sticking, which involved preventing nearby keys
(especially adjascent ones) from being hit in rapid
succession, although a certain amount of limiting
the typing speed was involved also. But that was
the means, not the end.
But the Dvorak layout, supposedly designed for faster
typing speed, is barely (if at all, which is debated)
better. It makes most of the same mistakes as qwerty.
> Windows key. ...don't need no stinkin' Windows key!
I use it on a very rare occasion to background a DOS
app that for one reason or another has to have the
usual Windoze keyboard shortcuts (Alt-Tab, Ctrl-Esc,
and so on) disabled. But instead of being right where
I hit it by mistake all the time, I wish it were off
to the right of the F12 key or someplace like that.
> The "designed for Windows" sticker fell of my laptop
> and stuck to the wastebasket. ...don't know how that
> happened.
Can't imagine. FWIW, this is a multiboot system,
not a Windoze-only system.
> > Actually, what I'd really like to try is to increase
> > the number of buckies and reduce the number of regular
> > keys by doubling up he letters and numbers.
> Sounds too complicated.
It is somewhat...
> I liked the "chord" keyboards.
And that's *less* complicated? It's the same idea,
taken further to the extreme.
> > The only thing I'll probably leave untouched are
> > the cursor movement keys on the keypad. I like
> > them just like they are.
>
> Home and End could be done better.
I'm used to them, and I like them. They're within
easy reach while you're using the arrows and page
up and page down, which is the critical thing.
Other keys I could do without are capslock and numlock.
Capslock I *only* hit by mistake, and numlock I hit my
mistake more often than intentionally. Actually, the
numlock key is a good idea, it's just in the wrong place.
It should be up in middle of the row above the function
keys or someplace.
The guy who invented capslock should be shot. With
sawed-off shotguns, loaded with rock salt. Tell the
firing squad to aim for his feet.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Modem trouble
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:13 GMT
Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At that point, it might also be a good idea to change the IRQ
> on the modem to some unused IRQ and use setserial to tell Linux
> about the change. I'm not really up on the latest advances, but
> conventionally it's been a bad idea to share IRQs.
ISA devices almost never like to share IRQs.
Does the modem have jumpers for setting which COM port
and IRQ to use?
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Modem trouble
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:13 GMT
Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Krstanovic states that this modem worked under
> DOS; doesn't that mean it's *not* a winmodem??
Generally. If it works in DOS without a driver.
(In DOS, unlike in Windows, you always know for
sure whether you're using a driver or not.)
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch.storage,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
Subject: Re: today's harddrives will surely fail before dialup users manage to fill
them up?
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:06 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
> > > I just bought a 45GB drive and have
> > > already filled over 1/2 of it.
> >
> > How did you do that?
>
> It helps to partition it multiple ways
Also, get a scanner.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:10 GMT
"Monte Milanuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> system they were touting for this task was WinNT4. Scary.
Better NT than your garden variety Windows. NT can at
least go weeks without a reboot. I wouldn't trust it
in an environment where a one-minute outage once a
year could kill people, but NT is at least of such
quality that it's potentially worth buying a UPS unit
for an NT box; whereas, putting a Windows or MacOS
system on an UPS is pointless. (I have a coworker
whose office Windows '95 PC is on an UPS, provided by
UAN. Silly government.)
There are degrees of stability. NT is stable enough
for many purposes. If you don't mess with it by
installing new software all the time and changing
the configuration.
Not that I have great love for NT. (No, great
love for an OS is reserved for PC-DOS 3.3, the
OS my first computer used.) But it's not a heap
of steaming refuse like certain OSes.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:08 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hartmann Schaffer) wrote:
> all the reasons you give describe a thin client arrangement,
A one-computer-many-terminals arrangment fits even better.
The terminals can be VT100s or whatever. Win3.1 boxes?
Shoot, you could use 8088s (e.g., the original IBM PC
from 1980), but that would be overkill.
> You're ignoring the one about management. Consider that
> many factories operate 24/7, which means they never shut
> down the terminals and the "application" runs constantly.
> When you upgrade the application, the terminals are still
> running it. You have to get all the clients to shutdown
> and load the new version.
That's silly. All you need is to queue the upgrade to
any given page until nobody's looking at it. Or if you
need to upgrade the software they're using to view the
pages, install the new version, set it up so that when
a terminal is reset it uses the new version, and leave
the old version in place for a few weeks until every
terminal has been reset. You want something that can
be up 24/7? Base it on OpenVMS or on Unix, and get
an online uninterruptible power supply for the
computer; hook that up to an emergency generator, and
you can go years without downtime. Your terminals will
go down when there's a power outage, so you also need
generator hookup for the vital ones. With UPS, you
wouldn't need the generator unless the power goes out
for more than a few minutes, but better safe than sorry;
get a generator. The terminals don't need to be on UPS
because if the power supply is interrupted for two
seconds while the generator kicks in, the user will
barely notice. But you don't want the computer's power
supply to be out for that long, so it needs the
online UPS for totally uninterrupted operation.
Above all, you don't want the computer stopping for
no reason, so run it on Unix or VMS, and you won't
go down unless there's a hardware problem or some
idiot runs a forkbomb.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Modem trouble
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:11 GMT
"Roy Bamford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You shouldn't have a ISA modem on COM2 unless your PC has
> only one COM port, which is very unusual.
ISA modems sometimes like COM2 in my experience. Mine can
be jumpered for various ports, but it only *works* (in *any*
OS) if it's jumpered for COM2. YMMV. Also, my ISA modem
only works in some OSes if "PNP OS Installed" and "Allocate
IRQ for USB" are disabled in the BIOS.
But before you mess with any of that (well, go ahead and
turn off "PNP OS" in the BIOS; that's just a given), go
ahead and try using minicom and see if you can talk to
your modem with AT commands. If you can type in ATZ in
minicom and get back Ok, then your modem may not be the
problem. If minicom complains that /dev/modem does not
exist, try making /dev/modem a symbolic link (man ln
for how to do this) to /dev/ttyS1 (i.e., COM2). If you
can talk to the modem in minicom, try dialing (ATDT#######
for tone dial or ATDP####### for pulse). If you hear
the modem dialing, then the modem is _definitely_ working.
If you can't get that far, you may have to do something
else, like check for IRQ conflicts or rejumper the modem.
> If you have two COM ports on the motherboard, you must
> disable the motherboard COM2: as it will clash with the
> ISA card. It may or may not work then.
This is so. If minicom can't talk to the modem, you'll
need to investigate this, as well as IRQ issues.
> Most ISA modems were modems and COM ports on the same card, so you must get
> Linux to see your ISA COM port before it will see the modem. However, I have
> never come across a 56k ISA card. Are you sure its not a PCI card?
That's an excellent question; I've never heard of a 56k
ISA modem either. (Not that I'm certain there aren't
any; I've just never heard of one before.) If it's PCI,
that changes everything, and you should post the exact
manufacturer and model number of the modem, or check
the hardware compatibility lists.
> There are two classes of computer users,
> those who do backups and
> those who have never had a hard drive fail.
Heh,heh,heh. It's more complicated than that... there
are people who had a hard drive fail once long ago, and
they *mean* to keep backups, but it's been months...
like me.
Then there are people who are paranoid and keep regular
offsite backups even though they've never had a drive
fail, because they've seen buildings burn down.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Subject: Re: Two more hardware install problems
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:11 GMT
"Ron Freidel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can't help with the printer, don't like hp injet printers....
HP is better for laser printers; for inkjet, Epson.
IMO, YMMV, and all that. And of course all the printer
companies have so many different models that you have
to do your homework.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Subject: Re: Modem trouble
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:34:12 GMT
Dougie Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The rockwell chipset is a winmodem
Err, no, or not all of them at any rate. I've
seen a rockwell-chipset ISA modem with hardware
flow control and set it up to work with Linux
with little difficulty after I tweaked some
settings in the BIOS (notably, PNP OS). It
wasn't 56k, however.
Apparently, some manufacturers make hardware
modems and also make cheaper software modems,
so the manufacturer alone is not enough info
to know which kind you've got.
- jonadab
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX
From: Archisman Rudra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 Apr 2001 09:26:46 -0400
Here is an idea. I am not sure it will work. Some bios-es have trouble
with large partition sizes. Since linux uses bioses to boot, the
booting partition has to be completely contained within a certain
number of cylinders. Can you repartition so that the booting partition
(say you mount /boot there) is just a few 100 megs and see what
happens? Ofcourse, your root can be anything.
archi
"Salim Douba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 23-Apr-2001, Floyd Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Salim Douba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Hi All,
> > >
> > >This is a peculiarly interesting problem. I am trying to install linux on
> > >my
> > >laptop. Things go extremely well during installation. The system reboots
> > >successfully (from hard disk) upon finishing the install and is fully
> > >usable. Subsequent reboots however, fail to bring up the system. I don't
> > >even get to the point of seeing the Linux boot prompt. Instead BIOS
> > >prompts
> > >me with a message that there is no valid bootable partition on my disk.
> > >For
> > >now, I am rebooting from a boot floppy. But I would really appreciate
> > >being
> > >able to boot from the hard disk.
> > >
> > >Any ideas?
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >Salim
> > >
> > >P.S. Please email me your responses at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Please read the newsgroups that you have posted to
> >
> > Boot from a floppy. Check the lilo configuration and
> > run lilo. Run fdisk and make sure you have marked a
> > partition as bootable. Then reboot without the floppy.
> >
> > --
> > Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
> > Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I did all the above to no avail.
------------------------------
From: Dougie Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Modem trouble
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:52:17 +0100
M. Buchenrieder wrote:
> That's news to me, then. I was always under the impression that the
> drivers needed to be run in protected mode - which DOS obviously
> isn't capable of providing.
>
> Michael
True, there are third party dos extensions that provide protected mode
though. I don't remember the specific program the PCTel used in dos
installation - just that it was a bit of a dodgy work around.
--
Dougie Richardson //================================
//
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================// http://www.incarnate.uklinux.net
------------------------------
From: Dougie Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Interesting failure rebooting LINUX
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:59:31 +0100
Salim Douba wrote:
> To the MBR
Have a look at the NT OS Loader + Linux Mini Howto - it says that you are
best to use the root partition as the boot partition. I can't say as I know
whether NT re-writes the MBR but I know that Win98 will overwrite it during
installation so try using /dev/hda1 as your target partition.
--
Dougie Richardson //================================
//
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=================// http://www.incarnate.uklinux.net
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
