Comments are in line!
> Redhat tells me no where how its kernal installs default. It only gives me
> 2 options in its chapter "next steps after install".. To do a modular or
> monolithic compile. My netowrk card (Linksys 10/100 using the PNIC chip)
> is not supported by Redhat's driver. It requires version .83 or above to
> work. I had to find it on the net, download it, modify the C code to
> enable full duplex support and then install it.
The following link does not list Linksys 10/100 (PNIC or otherwise) in
the Manhattan compatibility list and it also clearly states the
following: "Not listed = not supported"!
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/rhl/intel/rh51-hardware-intel-11.html#ss11.4
This link does not list Linksys 10/100 (PNIC or otherwise) in the
Hurricane compatibility list and it also clearly states the
following: "Not listed = not supported"!
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/rhl/intel/rh50-hardware-intel-11.html#ss11.1
This link does not list Linksys 10/100 (PNIC or otherwise) in the
Biltmore compatibility list and it also clearly states the
following: "Not listed = not supported"!
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/rhl/intel/rh42-hardware-intel-11.html
The HCL for NT 3.51 at Microsoft's site lists the Linksys ISA card but
not the 10/100 PCI (PNIC or otherwise).
The HCL for NT 4.0 at Microsoft's site lists the Linksys 10/100 PCI
card but doesn't adress the chipset (PNIC or otherwise).
I have one very simple question, Scott...
Why would you attempt to use a hardware device which is clearly stated
as incompatible? You wouldn't do it with NT and I know you wouldn't
'cause I know you know that OS and have seen a few BSOD's. So why is
Linux somehow suspect because the driver isn't available in the
official release? Since I know you've had that happen to you with
client and server OS's of other flavors I'd say you're levying
criticism where none is due! Congratulations are due you since you
made it work in spite of the missing driver! I suspect you'd have done
the same with NT or 95, the only difference being that you
probably wouldn't have had to compile the thing for M$ products. This,
by the way is truly a feature when it comes to using the most powerful
and customizable OS in the world *NIX or LINUX. You are not limited!
You do not have to "take what the geniuses at the software house give
you". If you don't have it out of the box somebody somewhere has
produced it 'cause there's about a zillion folks out there writing
stuff for Linux! Your situation and solution is an excellent example
of this very thing. This is bad....?
I have had a business relationship for a while now with a manufacturer
of high end servers who's based in Maryland. You should hear what he
has to say about the timeliness that certain hardware manufacturers
have with the provision of driver spec's for their products. Many
vendors write their own drivers and the ones that don't, eventually,
provide their spec's to the OS developers so their product can be
supported. Since Linux driver development, likely as not, is happening
in a private domicile in Spain, Brazil, Israel, or the U.S. what do you
suppose the likelihood is that this vendor is gonna provide that spec
to the guy or gal punching out the code in that domicile? Believe it
or not it happens, but when it doesn't these folks dissassemble and port
an existing driver or write one from scratch! This is bad....?
> The installations instructions for a modular kernel install consisted of
> executing 5 commands and for a monolithic it was recompile the kernel.
> Redhat's instructions on the monolithic compile are giberish so I'm
> avoiding that. I chose to do a monolithic kernel to support simple
> upgardes. I gather from your responce that Redhat has already done
> this to a point thus poor documentaton lead me to re-compile my kernal.
> No biggy since it worked,,just wasted 2 hours of my time.
RedHat's kernel compilation instructions aren't gibberish! They work,
first time, every time, if you do exactly what they say. Your
situation as a neophite is a perfect case in point. I think the issue
here is that you're missing the real reason someone might want to
compile it in the first place. Rich K. could probably say this better
since he's far more experienced with *NIX than I but the long and short
of it is that it's a technique for optimization of memory usage which
directly effects the speed of the OS in operation by eliminating
superfluous items and adding required/desired items. The smaller the
kernel, the smaller the memory footprint in RAM. The more unnecessary
stuff you get rid of the faster the thing's gonna run 'cause it's doing
less work per clock cycle. It's largely a function of intended use! I
use a modular kernel on one of my machines 'cause it's my primary
workstation (the box that I'm typing on in fact) and I might decide to
make a change to it and the modularity gives me that capability without
requiring a recompile. I got it down to about 385K which was very
satisfying to me! (Could you do that with NT?;-) The other machine is
monolithic all the way 'cause I have no intention of ever changing a
thing on it, it's a server, and that's all.
> Absolutley. Even developers of libraries such as Qt don't have RMPs on
> their web site (atleast not that I could find). I looked on sunday since I
> wanted to use KDE for Xwindows. It needs Qt libraries and what I found was
> two pages of ugly installation instructions for Qt. Ihave since found out
> that there are RPMs for the Qt libraries at Sunsite. I might get to try
> KDE afterall.
The QT RPM's are at RedHat's site too, Scott. The links I sent you
were from Sunsite because RedHat is so popular their FTP site was
buried with users and I couldn't get there. I think that's a nice
problem for RedHat to have but I'm glad there are mirrors!
Keep rockin!
--
Chuck Mead
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.moongroup.com
"Never underestimate the power of a small tactical nuclear weapon."
This message was sent with Tkrat v1.1
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
