>> I have a very simple situation > > NO you don't have a "simple" situation. In the last 5 mails you wrote, > your "simple situation" changed everytime. Get you damn facts straight. > Which card is supposed to be your realtime NIC, which one not? Heck, my setup changed because I changed it. What is wrong with that? Every setup gives the same behaviour so what are you getting confused about? And I DO have a simple situation. 2 or 3 cards either the same chip or different, what is so complicated about that? Always the first card that must be rt the rest normal. Sorry but I don;t see what is complicated here. Maybe its because I am German.
>> Afraid my concern about running normal ethernet with another NIC on >> rtnet was justified? :( > > you should stop making these kinds of comments. > I hate the following words but I am gonna write them: > "It works here, so it is a problem at your side" You're a genius. I was not aware of the fact that the problem was on my side, I thought you were having the problems and I was helping. :) Of course the problem is on my side. Most probably I am doing something wrong but from the information I have been given, I cannot make out what. That is what this list is for? Or is it only to establish shortcomings in the code? rtnet-USERS. Right? > > We have your setup running. 3 NICs, two running the normal linux > ethernet driver, one rt_8139too. > That is the reason I created the cards= patch in the first place, > because we needed the third and only the third NIC to be the RT card. Super. But in fact by the sound of things I don't need the cards= patch at all. I have the ability to put in two cards of different chips in. Which, if I understand you correctly would imply that I should not lose non-rt functionality on the card that is not allocated a rt driver. > > And again: it works flawlessly. Get your setup straight. check your > routes. check your subnets. I guess this is what I have to do. Of course I have no idea yet how to do this and what to set them to. If you have cooled down would you care to comment? ;) > > over and out What is the point of getting so worked up? Ignore this email if you think its a waste of time or an insult to your patch which it is not. I hate to use these words but I'll say them none the less they may do you some good: "grow up" But thanks for your emails to date. They have been helpful despite my setup not functioning yet. Sorry for unintentionally blowing your fuses and causing severe short-circuits somewhere. This is meant sincerely I'm not the one with the gripes. :) Roland. > > CU Fabian > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > RTnet-users mailing list > RTnet-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ RTnet-users mailing list RTnet-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users
