Thanks DH, My reply was slightly misunderstood.
I see it below, I left out some commas.
Any old PCI MB will take an UltraATA controller card and run that drive.
BUT --- WITH the "right" OS AND card drivers.
The "problems" with the OS I referred to was finding a card chipset driver
for the OS wanted. Different card manufacturers and chipset or card revision
numbers caused me "non-usable" problems as the OS versions advanced.
The older chipset revision numbers dropped off the supported OS driver list...
(New firmware, if available, did not help.)
That is why I considered the OS (driver area) the limiting factor.
Sorry for being too general before.
Glad you have a new pet project.
I finally am taking a serious look at Ubuntu, and figuring out why it seems to
hate some of my relatively main stream bland hardware.
I'm fighting known reported "bugs" that no one seems to have worked on
that go back to 2006... I have had the same problems on totally different
hardware combinations, and going back a similarly long time.
It is not my intention to infuriate the Linux members of this list, if any.
Some people on other lists get a little touchy when you complain about
their OS types.
Rick Glazier
--------------------------------------------------
From: "DHSinclair" > j,
Thank you for that link. It crisply explained much of what I stumbled
into. I will just save my 160GB pata drive as a spare for one of my other
running pata systems (using the same 160GB drive).
It seems, from my read, that an "old" 440BX chipset will never
recognize/deal with a drive this large, regardless of Bios (or other)
trickery. Fine. I have been slapped down yet again! I stopped slogging
at it 2 weeks ago. I have not completed the disassembly yet. Let's call it
good, warm, old memories. I may still try my Promise Ultra133-tx2 card;
Just4Grins!!!!!
I have a new toy ATM......(new focus!)....... :)
Rick,
Yes, I do try to keep my old stuff working; when it does not seem to have
visible internal problems. This time, it seems, I was fighting technology
change I had forgotten about over the years since 199x. You win, My
Bad! I get another black star! Jeez........(I sure hope my report card is
private! .... LOL!
Thank you,
Duncan
At 02:29 10/28/2008 -0700, you wrote:
List a Window OS post 9x/me that can't do lba48? Right, none, so a
non-problem with the right add-on controller card w/BIOS.
Random interesting link:
http://www.dewassoc.com/kbase/hard_drives/hard_drive_size_barriers.htm
Rick Glazier wrote:
I agreed...
I listed three things and said to stay under 120G to avoid them all...
Then listed the one (the OS) most likely to be a problem.
Rick Glazier
--------------------------------------------------
From: "maccrawj"
UltraATA controller w/ BIOS support for LBA48 trumps system BIOS limits
on size.
Rick Glazier wrote:
Philosophy aside, you can sometimes get a PCI MB to boot from a
UltraATA controller card
and use a HD larger than 137G (or so), but getting the right
combination of MB BIOS booting
options and chipset driver and OS compatibility can be a problem.
Like someone said, if you stay under 120G, you might not trip any
limitations.
(Even the OSs will have HD size limitations...)
Mixing new with old can get messy fast...
