Linux-Hardware Digest #222, Volume #9 Tue, 19 Jan 99 21:13:36 EST
Contents:
Re: This ongoing flame-fest ("DG")
HTTP/FTP SPACE FOR FREE! PLUS A FREE EMAIL! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Epson 700 Photo (willk)
Re: Want Linux bogomips numbers for Intel PII-450 (Bernd Paysan)
Re: X Windows Display Problem ("Mark B. Simpkins")
AMD K6 3Dnow cpu with m590 motherboard supported in linux 2.0.36 ? (Dupre)
Re: Does linux support Dual CPUs? (Gerald Roth)
Can't Install Redhat 5.1 - Autoprobe can't find SCSI ("Elisa F Roselli")
Re: 98 - Linux dual boot with a large disk - Help! (Bernardo Santos Wernesback)
miro 20SV with XFree86 3.3.3 (Gerald Roth)
Re: SCSI: Unable to allocate DMA channel for Adaptec. (Bjorn Halvor Solberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.install,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: This ongoing flame-fest
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 06:01:37 GMT
Yeah, well thanks for sharing your crap. Now go and stuff some vomit on your
face, pigfart !!!
Moriarty wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Hey all...
>
>I personally like to read this and other Linux related newsgroups for the
>same reasons many of your others do: To learn from one another and help one
>another, if we are able of course... Unfortunatly, there is now a
flame-fest
>going on in this thread, and personally, I wish it would stop.
>
>I am not attempting to flame anyone on either the majority users or DG's
>side... I am just trying to clear the air... I mean, for many of us, USENET
>is more than just newgroups... USENET is a way of life... And, like in the
>real world, it is usually better for us to get along and become productive,
>than to always be angry and everything get destroyed in a heartbeat...
>
>To DG: I read your first post (the initial post that started this) that
>requested help from the members of these groups. I was going to respond to
>you, but I first (like usual) read the other people responses to your
>responses and, to be honest with you, after re-reading all the posts of
this
>thread over and over again, I fail to understand why you are so upset with
>us. In my opinion (and I'm sure yours and others will have differing ones),
I
>think many other people at first tried to help you find the easiest, least
>time-consuming way to solve your original problem. To be honest with you, I
>am all for the idea that one can log on to the net at any time and download
>either patches, updates, or the whole smoe of the Linux OS for free. The
fact
>that it was originally made available by Mr. Torvaldes in the source code
>format for free under the GPL is what has enable others and myself to
legally
>enhance and modify these sources and re-distribute them back on the net so
>that others, in whatever way they can, can benefit from the total sum of
our
>collective knowledge. Now, Mr. DG, I have collaborated with Microsoft
before
>on several projects and beta testing surveys, and I personally can tell you
>the frustration I felt when I needed to re-format my Windows partitions and
>do a complete re-install because of some renegade thread in a program which
>screwed it all up. I don't know about you, but if the only way you could
>restore Windows was to make a disk which has just the proper software,
tools,
>and drivers on it to just connect to your ISP, and then make the FTP
>connection each and every time the system dies, I think you would get
rather
>tired of repeating this task over and over again... I mean, a good complete
>software on Linux, in my opinion is over 500+ MB, and the basic Windows 98
>stuff is around what, 240 MB or so? And then, after you have spent the time
>required to download the software, then have to spend the time waiting to
>install it, you may be looking at several hours (based on the transfer
>figures you gave us at 500 MB/2 hours), and having a CD copy, in my humble
>opinion, would be a heckuva lot easier to keep on hand then to have to keep
>repeatedly downloading over and over again. When the earlier posters
>suggested that you make a purchase of one of the various CD-ROMS available,
>they were not trying to insult your intelligence, or take away your rights
as
>an Internet user - they (and I) were just speaking from the experience that
>years of tinkering and hassles of trying new things out has taught us. I
>believe one gentleman suggested you go to the Cheapbytes website
>(http://www.cheapbytes.com) and purchase the Linux distrubution for $1.99
>(w/Total shipping charges it comes to around $8.50 or so in US Dollars)...
>I honestly believe that these people were not trying to pick on you or
start
>a fight or deny you anything which you feel you are entitled to. I believe
>that they were under the impression from your posts that you had some past
>familarity with Linux (RedHat Distributions in particular) and were ready
to
>make the switch from Windows 9x as your primary OS to Linux. (I myself got
>that same impression after reading your initial posts based on how you were
>wanting to set up your hardware per your descriptions)... The reason why
they
>told you to buy the premade CD-ROM was to save you both time and money - I
>mean, didn't you yourself say that you didn't want to shell out the cash to
>get a CD-ROM burner? No offense to you, but in my opinion, $1.99 + shipping
>is *MUCH* *MUCH* cheaper than several hundred dollars for a *good*
>CD-ROM burner... I think maybe you mistook these other peoples posts as
being
>critical of you, when in fact (in my opinion) they were actually trying to
>save you some grief... Now, be honest with us here - when you first got to
>the point in your self-taught education, how many times did you get to the
>point where a re-install of Windows 9x was necessary? Several I bet. Now,
it
>is true, both of my opinion and of several millions of Linux users (and
>Microsoft also, according to their in-house memos) that Linux is far more
>stable an environment (especially for development and Net applications)
than
>Windows 9x / NT, but we also realize that nothing is ever perfect and that
>there is always the possibility of a crash or a major bug popping up where
a
>re-install of all systems maybe necessary. Now do you see why having a
backup
>CD-ROM would be desireable? I mean, all your drives are wiped: So, you
would
>have to 1. Set up Windwos 9x all over again. 2. Install the Internet FTP
>software 3. Configure the Net stuff 4. Dial-up/Connect and FTP all those
>hundreds of MB all over again... 5. Reboot and setup Linux... 6. Configure
>everything that you lost in the crash... 7. Fix every little minor detail
you
>may have missed... And so on and so on... With a CD-ROM, you could take a
>good two hours off of this process... Maybe you don't run a website (or
maybe
>you do), but I know that there are many on USENET who also double as
>webmasters and such, and if the servers are down, then they are losing
>money... Are you with me so far?
>
>Now, personally, I have no opinion on how you get your money or what you
>choose to do with it. if it is your money and you earned it, then you have
>ever right to do with it as you see fit. Same with what you choose to do
with
>your hardware and/or software you already own or already buy... If you were
>to decide to go out and buy a K7-500 Mhz CPU in 6 months or so, I would say
>more power to you, and I would support you in any way possible (as well as
be
>secertly envious :) The type of people who run OSes like Linux are the type
>of people who like to tinker, problem-solvers and developers who like to
get
>in and get their hands-dirty with new software and hardware, to push the
>technology envelope to the extreme (or as extreme as they can get)... In my
>opinion, if I am starting out on something brand new, and there is someone
>who obviously is more knowledgeable about it than me on it, I am most
>*defintely* going to try and learn from them or ask them their advise... I
>don't have to agree with it or do what they say... Nothing says that you
are
>obligated to what the members of this group suggest... (It is your money,
>your hardware, and your software, and your time, after all) We will not be
>offended in any way as long as you respect our rights to our opinions...
>Hopefully, most of the time we are right, or can point you in the direction
>to a place (A website, for example) where you can find it on your own...
But,
>like all things in life, sometimes we are wrong... But remember, the
>USENET is for anyone who has any ideas at all to come and participate and
>share what both the newer people are looking for, as well as gain
experience
>from the people who have more knowledge and familarity... But remember, at
>any time you are free to stop logging into your NNTP server... You don't
have
>to post... There will always be people who will disagree on anything with
>you, no matter what the subject... The fact that we are able to form
>different opinions independently from anyone else is what probably
seperates
>humankind from the lesser species on the planet... You know what I mean?
You
>came on this group posting a problem, and we responded (or at least some of
>us did) - I'm not quite sure why you became so upset... I am at a lost as
to
>why this thread even got started and continued...
>
>Maybe you are a natural-born troublemaker... These people do exist.
>But, since I know nothing about you, and I have never met you or
encountered
>you in my personal life to the best of my knowledge, I am going to treat
you
>with the same respect and dignity that I would give any person either on
here
>or in the real world... But, once you abuse that trust that people given
you,
>then it is usually *very* difficult, if not impossible, to regain what was
>lost, and build again from there...
>
>All I ask that before you launch your newsreader and flame me to the ends
of
>the Earth for this post, is that you try to see my side of it - our side
>maybe? - and realize that nobody was trying to tell you what to do... On
the
>net, nobody knows anything about anybody else until you yourself tell us,
and
>there are lots of ways that people can tell traits in other people...
Please
>also realize that many of the people on the USENET have been *very*
longterm
>Internet users (I myself have been online for over fifteen years now) and
>while we may be set in our weird little ways, on most technical topics, we
do
>know what we are talking about... Take it from those who know, and maybe
you
>will save time, money, resources, and maybe even more importantly, make
some
>new friends... Of course, and I am only going to say it once, you screw
>around with the wrong people, and it is quite possible that you will not be
>logging on for soem time without *quite* a bit of effort...
>DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Thank you. :)
>
>I hope that DG and anyone else who reads this message will send me some
>feedback on this, whether good or bad... I welcome all opinions - good,
bad,
>indifferent, or completely new fresh ones... :)
>
>Thank you for your time and for your attentive patience... Take care, and
>have a good day...
>
>Moriarty
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: HTTP/FTP SPACE FOR FREE! PLUS A FREE EMAIL!
Date: Tuesday, 19 Jan 1999 16:03:36 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Hosting for absolutly free!!!
free http/ftp space... plus a free email!! you can put anything on our
serves to! (warez/mp3/porn/etc)
http://oproot.opx.com
!!!WebHosting For FREE!!!
___________________________
Ao<RjKhPW+ok0OJq>hrk&,Ejl#4+^y@b*ygDTURZA5Au21MSXI
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (willk)
Crossposted-To: comp.periphs.printers
Subject: Re: Epson 700 Photo
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:07:31 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am not sure about the linux support so I cant answer on that part
but the 700s output is as good as the samples. Just make sure you are
using the glossy paper of course.
As to the weight issue. I am not sure of the conversion but I just
printed some 110 lb card stock on mine and it worked fine. I used 80lb
for my Christmas cards but these were going to be cut into tickets. No
feeding problems at all.
willk
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999 13:27:53 +0000, Martin Booth
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>
>Aha, I knew that there was something I had forgotten. The specifications
>say that it won't handle any papaer thicker that 90 g/mē, is that correct,
>will it in fact handle thicker paper, since making invitation cards etc
>you need something about 50% thicker. Will it handle that?
>
>Martin Booth.
>
>P.S. In case of E-mails remover the nopsam.
------------------------------
From: Bernd Paysan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.intel,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Want Linux bogomips numbers for Intel PII-450
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 17:48:32 GMT
In article <77souq$osv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bjorn Lindgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Its just for veryfying that my newly bought PII-450 is a real one and
> not some remarked 300/350/400, do you know any other way?
> Maybe with SPECint95/SPECfp95 benchmark tool, but are that openly
> availble for Linux or *BSD, havent heard/seen of one.
If it's an overclocked one, it's as fast as the real thing, and the only
thing you can detect is that it might crash or burn through when applying
some special instruction sequences, but doesn't need to, depending on the
temperature. If it's just relabeled (without overclocking), then the BogoMips
should say something. But Linux also reports the MHz clock if it can read the
cycle counter on chip, and that's better than BogoMips for this one.
Mhz/BogoMips ratio:
Pentium 2.5 (one hit/one miss flaw(tm) in the branch prediction for
back-to-back branches on the same address) Pentium MMX 0.5 (no hit/miss
flaw(tm)) Pentium Pro/II 1.0 (one cycle stall for branch hit after hit)
Bernd Paysan
"Late answers are wrong answers!"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Mark B. Simpkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,at.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: X Windows Display Problem
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 14:37:10 -0800
Redhat 5.2--run XF86Setup and this runs xvidtune for you; you adjust the
screen and it saves the settings.
Eric Potter wrote:
>
> thomas maier-komor enlightened this group thus:
> > Andy Molnar wrote:
> >>
> >> I recently installed Red Hat 5.1 Linux. I'm a newbie for Linux, so I
> >> don't know much. I started X Windows, and display height is too large.
> >> The width is fine on my monitor, but the height reaches about a
> >> half-inch above and below the display area. I've selected different
> >> drivers during install for my video card, but the results are always the
> >> same. The video card I use is an ATI Mach64 VT. My monitor is a one
> >> not on the list (Packard Bell PB 8538SV), so I selected generic in setup
> >> (I doubt the monitor is the problem... I don't have the display problem
> >> in the shell prompt). If anyone knows how to fix this, please email
> >> me. Any help is appreciated.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Andy Molnar
> >
> > There is a utility called xvidtune with which you can tune the modeline
> > entries in the X configuration file. These modeline entries are
> > responsible for the geometry of the display. You can adjust height,
> > width, vertical and horizontal position.
>
> It wouldn't hurt to mention the fact that xvidtune does NOT save the modeline
> settings for you. They must be entered into the XF86Config file using your
> favorite test editor.
> --
> * ^ \ ___@
> *^ / \ \ | \
> / \/ \ \__| \
> / / ^ \ \
> / \ \ Eric Potter
> / ^ ^ \ \
--
Mark B. Simpkins (650)933-7515
Silicon Graphics, Inc. Check Out Our Web Site on Silicon Surf
Remanufactured Products http://www.sgi.com/products/remanufactured/
64 bytes from 150.166.157.117: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=1 ms
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dupre)
Subject: AMD K6 3Dnow cpu with m590 motherboard supported in linux 2.0.36 ?
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 23:12:57 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Planning in buying one shortly
when i now it's supported by linux
Thx for your help
------------------------------
From: Gerald Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does linux support Dual CPUs?
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 19:00:49 GMT
Daryl Stultz wrote:
. Does this
> support dual processors? Is this a function of the kernal or do apps need to
> be written with dual in mind?
hi
SMP (multi processing) is a basic linux kernel feature, especially of
the new 2.1.x/2.2.0 kernel.
applications take advantage of the SMP only if they are written
multi-threaded (the new glibc c libraries support that i think)
i hope all this info is right (i don't have a smp machine)
geronimo
------------------------------
From: "Elisa F Roselli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Can't Install Redhat 5.1 - Autoprobe can't find SCSI
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 01:04:31 +0100
Hello,
I need to install Redhat Linux 5.1 on a partition of my hard disk. I've been
trying for years now to get Linux on a partition and I never get past
installation. Now, with a relatively new computer and version of Linux I'm
still completely blocked.
One of the first questions the installation procedure asks is whether there
are any SCSI adapters on the computer. Now, when I checked out my
configuration under Windows/System, I found 2 items under "SCSI
Controllers": the SCSI card that I installed myself for my scanner (AGFA
Snapscan 310 SCSI), which is called Adaptec AVA -1505 SCSI Host Adapter, and
the IOMEGA
Parallel Port Zip Interface, for my IOMEGA Zip 100 drive.
The installation procedure's autoprobe refuses to recognise either of these
adapters.
This despite the fact that "Parallel Port Zip" is actually listed among the
options of recognized adapters. As for the Adaptec, it is not apparently
recognised, so I tried all the other Adaptec options with the same result.
On all occasions, the automatic recognition process sends up "I can't find
this X anywhere on your system". It then wants me to specify some sort of
obscure module parameters. Damned if I know.
I would have thought these peripherals were relatively banal. It's not like
a Zip 100 drive is the most exotic thing on earth. Can anyone suggest where
I should go from here?
Many thanks,
Elisa Francesca Roselli
------------------------------
From: Bernardo Santos Wernesback <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: 98 - Linux dual boot with a large disk - Help!
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 21:57:04 -0200
Preston Crawford wrote:
> Okay, after earlier attempts to triple boot I've decided just to do a dual
> boot do to NT compatibility problems with my system and the fact that I have
> a second computer I can put NT on. What I want to know is how I should
> partition and setup my 13GB drive to handle a 98/Linux dual-boot. Every time
> I go to setup Linux after setting up 98 Linux sees the whole extended
> partition (11GB) and I only want to give it about 5. So should I partition
> the whole drive before hand? Will Linux be able to drop the OS onto one of
> the logical drives? And in this kind of situation do I still install 98
> first?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Preston
Hi,
If you want you can put NT in the same HD with no problem at all. Basically what
you would do is not use LILO and put a Linux option in the NT Loader menu.
If you want instructions on how to do that please contact me at my email
address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
See ya,
Bernardo Santos Wernesback
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Gerald Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: miro 20SV with XFree86 3.3.3
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 18:55:00 GMT
hi
i can't set up XF86 (3.3.3) for my miro 20SV (S3 964)
neither the S3 server nor the SVGA server work
the best result i get is a black screen and a correct displayed mouse
(the mouse cursor changes when being moved)
i don't know what is going wrong (i think the card is fucked up - it
just likes unstable, expensive os (windoze is displayed correctly))
i tried a lot different configuration settings
RAMDAC, options (bt9845vclk),...
it just doesn't work
now i use the wonderful monochrome server :-)
please help!!!
thanx geronimo
------------------------------
Subject: Re: SCSI: Unable to allocate DMA channel for Adaptec.
From: Bjorn Halvor Solberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 Jan 1999 10:49:06 -0800
This is just a message to tell how I finally got it all to work. I
started out with enabling the BIOS on the Adaptec 1542CF card, and then
using it to change the DMA channel to 6. That prevented the "Unable to
allocate..." message, but now Linux wouldn't finish booting - it kept
failing while it probed the SCSI bus, saying:
scsi0 : Adaptec 1542
scsi : 1 host
scsi : aborting command due to timeout: pid 0, scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Test Unit
Ready 00 00 00 00 00
SCSI host 0 abort (pid 0) timed out - resetting
SCSI bus is being reset for host 0 channel 0.
Sent BUS_DEVICE_RESET to target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
Sending DID_RESET for target 0
[...]
whereupon it repeated itself from line 3 above. Then, booting Win95, the
Device Manager tells me (after I have configured the Adaptec) that IRQ 11
conflicts with my TGUI 9660 graphics card - /proc/interrupts in Linux
doesn't mention this, maybe because there is no device driver for this
card in the kernel like it is in Windows?
So, back to changing the IRQ for the AHA-1542CF to use IRQ 10, DMA 6
(still) instead. I get the same result in Linux as before, but at least
Win95 doesn't report any conflicts for IRQ 10 and DMA 6 for the Adaptec
card. No conflicts noted with the BIOS either. Win95 lists the Adaptec
with an exclamation mark, something the Adaptec faq (somewhere on
http://www.adaptec.com/) says can be because there's a virus on the
system. There are no viruses, but since I was at adaptec anyway I went
ahead and downloaded new drivers and diagnostics programs (for Win95,
they had no information regarding Linux). The diagnostics program
couldn't do anything but confirm that the ASPI drivers were correctly
installed and functioning.
After several iterations of installing and reinstalling various versions
of drivers with no luck regarding solving the problem, I got around to
changing the IRQ on the Adaptech 1542CF to 9 instead of 10. Presto!
Win95 now had my Adaptec as a functioning device, and recognized my
scanner (UMAX Astra 1220S). With a light heart I booted Linux, and found
that Linux too now booted just fine and recognized my scanner - so did
SANE and friends.
So, even though neither Linux, Win95 nor the BIOS indicated a conflict
with IRQ 10 for my computer, evidently there must have been one even so -
what, I don't know. The moral of the story must be to spend more time
experimenting with all combinations of DMA/IRQ channels/numbers before
spending time downloading extra drivers, installing and reinstalling.
My thanks to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron Bredon) in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(M. Buchenrieder) in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who got me onto the first
right track.
Bjorn.
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.hardware) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
******************************
