El 24-Jun-99 Tom Taylor dijo:
> At 11:06 AM 6/24/99 -0300, you wrote:
>>I've just compiled (twice...) a kernel version 2.2.9 both with SCSI
>> [...]
> Hi Jose:
Hi, Tom. Thanks to you and extensive to all who answered. :)
And sorry for my delay in replying.
> To me, "sda4" doesn't seem right. Have you tried "sda1" or just "sda"?
> I've never worked with any parallel port devices other than a printer so am
> not sure about this. Hopefully someone else can provide a better answer.
> I'd like to hear an answer to - if sda4 is correct, what are sda1..3?
> Is this something peculiar to parallel port devices?
Well... I first read about mounting Iomega pport under as /dev/sda4 in
Config-HOWTO and has worked properly in RedHat 5.1 and 5.2 with default kernels
(Series 2.0.X).
I can still mount it if I boot with my original /boot/vmlinuz-2.0.36-07 .
But not with 2.2.9 . I can mount other vfat fs (hda1 is Win'98) so vfat and fat
modules are loading properly...
It's my first trial with 2.2.X, and I saw MANY differences, making evident how
fast Linux grows.
There are lots of "nodes" of the kernel decision tree pointing to different
kind of support for SCSI devices, something a bit confusing, at least for me.
It seems there are two different modules for Parallel Port Iomega Zip Drives:
One of them is the classic ppa.o and a new one is imm.o about which there's
some info within ..../linux/Documentation/ but I think it's not the case to
comment here. Anyone, none of them works.
I don't know if some more specific info may be of help (?)...
Well... that's all i can say now.
> [...]
> Richard, Lawson, how about it?
>
> Tom
---
Jose Albores <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tu "fortune":
It is often the case that the man who can't tell a lie thinks he is the best
judge of one.
-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"
