Thanks to everyone who responded.
The aacard driver patches that were in the Redhat pinstripe kernel SRPM
work fine with 2.2.17. The machine seems pretty stable and speed is about
the same as with the binary driver.
Thanks again...
Thanks to everyone who responded.
The aacard driver patches that were in the Redhat pinstripe kernel SRPM
work fine with 2.2.17. The machine seems pretty stable and speed is about
the same as with the binary driver.
Thanks again...
To: Jon Mitchell
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PERCRAID 3 drivers?
Though I am concerned about the KNOWNBUGS file that was in the 1.0.3 patch
but was removed by the later version patches. It seems to indicate its a
bad idea to compile it directly in the kernel. Is it better to compile
As a matter of fact I already have such a kernel compiled but I need to be
there in person to make sure it doesn't blow up. :)
There were four files:
linux-2.2.16-aacraid-1.0.3.patch
linux-2.2.16-aacraid-1.0.3-paths.patch
linux-2.2.16-aacraid-1.0.4.patch
linux-2.2.16-aacraid-1.0.5.patch
The
On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 09:40:18AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
> too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
> Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact
On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 09:40:18AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact me
To: Jon Mitchell
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PERCRAID 3 drivers?
Though I am concerned about the KNOWNBUGS file that was in the 1.0.3 patch
but was removed by the later version patches. It seems to indicate its a
bad idea to compile it directly in the kernel. Is it better to compile
So does this mean that the driver currently in redhat's pinstripe beta
should be avoided on an production SMP system? Is sticking with 2.2.14
perferable right now? Anyone know how far along the adaptec guys are?
Thanks for your time...
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > AFAIK, Dell
> So does this mean that the driver currently in redhat's pinstripe beta
> should be avoided on an production SMP system? Is sticking with 2.2.14
> perferable right now? Anyone know how far along the adaptec guys are?
Im quite sure the same bug is in there binary only drivers too. I thinl it
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
> too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
> Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact me
> privately.
In
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Bruce A. Locke wrote:
>
> Hello...
>
> The organization I do some work for purchased a rackmount server from
> Dell with the intent of running some webconferencing software under
> Linux. The salesman we had spoken to assured us that Linux fully
> supported the machine.
> AFAIK, Dell wrote these drivers themselfs and they are unwilling to release
The drivers for the percraid have adaptec copyrights and have been made
available finally but were too ugly at the moment to merge (and had some
obvious potentially nasty bugs like using down() on a spinlock
The
The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact me
privately.
Sincerely,
Matt Domsch
Dell Enterprise Systems Group
Linux
> The organization I do some work for purchased a rackmount server from
> Dell with the intent of running some webconferencing software under
> Linux. The salesman we had spoken to assured us that Linux fully
> supported the machine. Yeah... Right... :)
>
> Now it seems I'm stuck with a
The organization I do some work for purchased a rackmount server from
Dell with the intent of running some webconferencing software under
Linux. The salesman we had spoken to assured us that Linux fully
supported the machine. sarcasm Yeah... Right... /sarcasm :)
Now it seems I'm stuck
The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact me
privately.
Sincerely,
Matt Domsch
Dell Enterprise Systems Group
Linux
AFAIK, Dell wrote these drivers themselfs and they are unwilling to release
The drivers for the percraid have adaptec copyrights and have been made
available finally but were too ugly at the moment to merge (and had some
obvious potentially nasty bugs like using down() on a spinlock
The
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Bruce A. Locke wrote:
Hello...
The organization I do some work for purchased a rackmount server from
Dell with the intent of running some webconferencing software under
Linux. The salesman we had spoken to assured us that Linux fully
supported the machine.
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The aacraid driver was submitted to Alan Cox, but rejected because it has
too many "NTism's" in it, which are being addressed. Please see the Red Hat
Linux "Pinstripe" beta kernel source RPM for the source code, or contact me
privately.
In my
So does this mean that the driver currently in redhat's pinstripe beta
should be avoided on an production SMP system? Is sticking with 2.2.14
perferable right now? Anyone know how far along the adaptec guys are?
Im quite sure the same bug is in there binary only drivers too. I thinl it
just
So does this mean that the driver currently in redhat's pinstripe beta
should be avoided on an production SMP system? Is sticking with 2.2.14
perferable right now? Anyone know how far along the adaptec guys are?
Thanks for your time...
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
AFAIK, Dell
21 matches
Mail list logo
