Re: [expert] Mandrake 8.0 and aic7xxx
Hey fellas, I wonder, since I am having trouble with my zip250 scsi drive, (slow to mount and umount) is this related?? Can I get a newer (or older) version of the aic7xxx module? Thanks On Tuesday 12 June 2001 08:10 am, so spoke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > I did, sort of. It turns out that the version of the aic7xxx driver used > during the installation of LM8 is incompatible with many - if not all - > SCSI cdroms. I ended up replacing the cdrom with an IDE unit and the > install ran without timeouts. The install time went from about 6 hours down > to about 20 minutes. > > As I understand, the version of aic7xxx used in the LM8 2.4.3 kernel that > is installed does not have this problem, nor do the later kernels (I think > Alan incorporated the fix in 2.4.3ac-something). Supposedly you can switch > back to the SCSI cdrom post install. I've also since found out that > installing a physical terminator on the narrow chain (where the cdrom is) > also helps fix this problem in some setups. Also, make sure your adapter is > at the latest bios level. This problem reportedly happens more often in > older adapters due to a backwards-comaptibility issue between old and new > BIOS' from Adaptec. > > However, I had such a horrible time with LM8, I've since gone back to > LM7.2. If 8.1 doesn't come soon and prove (a) easier to burn to CD and (b) > more stable than 8.0 I'm considering moving back to RedHat or possibly to > SuSE. This is not the first time I've had SCSI related problems on LM. > > -Original Message- > From: Duncan Grant > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Sent: 6/12/01 8:31 AM > Subject: [expert] Mandrake 8.0 and aic7xxx > > jlemay, > > I'm have a similar problem to : > > scsi0:0:1:0: Command found on device queue > > aic7xxx_abort returns 8194 > > scsi0:0:1:0: Attempting to queue an ABORT > > Did you eventually find a solution, and if so what? > > > > Regards > Duncan Grant > Indovision
Re: [expert] hard drive experiences (was 8.0 final --brakes MANY applications (Software Installeris first on that list))
Whoa, do you think I should move to IBM drives now? I hear that they are good but I did not know that about the Quantum ones!---Whoa. On Thursday 26 April 2001 05:02 am, so spoke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > Quantum and Maxtor are now one, though you can still differentiate which > drive line belongs to who because the line names haven't changed. I hear > good things about both of these lines now, but my memory is still scared by > both. Even though I use IBM drives now, I still remember the stickion > drives that you had to beat on in order to get them to spin up. I also > remember those drives that had a faulty ground finger, so the spindle would > build up a static change and then discharge across the platters. When it > comes to Quantum, the memory of those winning drives that where not too > reliable is still very vivid in my mind. Also, some of my coworkers still > complain that they are partially deaf from those drives. You should have > seen the chuckles that I got out of one of my co-workers when I told him > that Quantum was advertising quite drives. I'm still too afraid to buy one > of these mostly do to how long they sold cruddy, whining drives. (Then > again they used to always be the low bidder.) > > I also have a Maxtor. I have been using computers with Maxtor drives ever > since my dad brought home a 286 with a full hieght 5 1/4 Maxtor drive. > (The drive started off as a business drive, but the computer it started off > on got retired.) The drive then moved on to a 386. The drive must of had > been in use for over 10 years and in that entire time, only few few > clusters went bad, taking out the display for my eighth grade science > project that I had labored many hours over. Since then I have almost > continually have had a Maxtor drive in one of my computers and I have never > had a problem. I remember a couple of years back I know someone that > worked for Fry's Electronics and he said that at the time he was seeing a > lot of Maxtor drives being returned because the heads snapped off. > > With Western Digital, I have had mixed experiences. My Dad once had a 1 GB > Western digital drive on his P100 back when the P100 was about the fastest > machine around. One of the heads snapped off on the first drive within a > few months, so he got Western Digital to replace the drive. The > replacement drive suffered the exact same fate a few months after that. A > few months before my Dad bought his P100, he picked up an 850 MB Western > Digital. He used that drive for a few years and then put it in storage. A > couple of years back I decided to build a buget firewall and got him to > give me the drive. To this day it is still in use on a machine that is > left running 24/7. Something to watch out for is that not all that long > ago Western Digital had a big recall of drives. My mother had a drive that > was manufactored right after the end of the recall and I just sent it back > because it was flaking out on her and when I tested it one of my computers, > it behaved poorly. With my brother's 18 GB 7200 RPM drive he had a problem > where one of the pins stayed in the connector on the IDE cable when he > unplugged the drive. Fortunately my Dad was able to solder it back on and > my brother hasn't had a problem since. I have also been hearing that more > recent Western Digital drives have bugs when working in UltraDMA mode. > > > I personally prefer Quantum hard drives, although I have not had > > any maxtors or WD, I know about IBM and Quantums being > > good linux drives.
Re: [expert] Mandrake 8.0 Success
For me Mandrake 8 performs good for the most part, I have been testing the poop out of it to get it to misbehave, and the only fatal thing that I found that happens, is that when you try to set up your /usr/bin/ktalkdlg in the control center under Network and then Talk configuration, the whole machine freezes, but other than that, it runs good. I thought I would give the postfix MTA a shot, although I had trouble finding out where the spam controls were, so I for now went back to sendmail. I think Konq quit crashing, but the user agent still appears to be broken, it will not save what you put in, or I forgot how to save it. On Thursday 26 April 2001 01:20 pm, so spoke Todd Flinders: > Okay, I finally got Mandrake 8.0 completely downloaded > and installed. Overall, I would say it's a success. > We've had a lot of people posting about problems and I > know that has discouraged some from trying 8.0. But > if you have a similar situation as me with a box that > can afford the risk, I actually recommend giving 8.0 a > try. > > I installed on: > > 512 Megs PC-133 RAM > Intel Pentium III 866 MHz > Asus CUSL2 mobo (with Intel 815E chipset) > Hercules Prophet II (GeForce 2 GTS w/ 64 Megs DDR) > 30 gig IBM ATA 100 hard drive > Pioneer 16x DVD drive > Yamaha 8/4/24 CDRW > Soundblaster Live! > Linksys EtherFast 10/100 NIC (LNE100TX) > Logitech wireless mouse + wheel and wireless keyboard > Viewsonic 19in PS790 > > Hardware not yet functioning: > > Sigma Hollywood Plus DVD decoder > Intel PocketPC Webcam > > Overall installation went pretty smoothly. Most of my > hardware was detected and set up without problems. > When Mandrake loaded it was attractive, stable, and > fast. > > I did not run into any major issues. Programs I > tested seemed to launch and function properly. I > remembered someone having GL problems and mentioning > TuxRacer as an example. After loading nvidia's > detonator drivers for Linux, I tried TuxRacer. It ran > perfectly (and the music is very cool!). Sound seems > to be working almost flawlessly with most applications > utilizing all four speakers + subwoofer. The only > "flaw" is that it is slightly quieter than in Windows. > Adjustments to the sound mixer application quickly > and easily brought the volume to acceptable levels > (but never quite as loud and crisp as windows). > > For those of you that were having mild problems with > the Linksys ethernet card in 7.2 like I was, you will > be happy to know that 8.0 installation detected and > installed Linksys and my network (Internet through > LAN) flawlessly and easily. If you are using the > LNE100TX, you will not have a problem with 8.0. > > There were a few small issues with 8.0, but nothing > overwhelming (for me!). > > If I chose the Logitech driver during installation, my > mousewheel would not function. I found that I had to > choose the Generic PS/2 with wheel driver. If you are > using the cordless Logitech wheelmouse, select the > generic driver and all will be fine. > > I loaded KDE and Gnome. Both seemed to have nice > improvements and ran fine. In Gnome you have to > answer a few basic questions for Eazel, but no big > deal. When I exited Gnome, though, my kdm did crash. > I'll have to look into that further. > > Hardware configuration reports a list of unknown Intel > devices. I suspect this is my chipset. Everything > seems to be functioning properly. So, I do not think > this is a big deal. The same thing occurred for me in > 7.2. > > My Hollywood Plus DVD decoder card is detected by the > Hardware configurator, but at this time it doesn't > appear to be functional. Sourceforge has some > experimental drivers for it that I will try over the > weekend. Anyone interested can check them out. > However, the HOWTO stresses the immaturity of these > drivers so it would be inappropriate to expect > Mandrake to support this card at this time. > > My USB Intel PocketPC Webcam was not detected at all > buy the Hardware Configurator. However, this webcam > uses a progressive scan CCD to take its photos. I > haven't yet found any projects for such a webcam. So, > again, I do not expect Mandrake to support this any > time soon. > > The only real issue that I had was that (believe it or > not) when looking at certain webpages using certain > fonts, those fonts would be messed up. Even more > surprising is that I tried this with Konqueror and > Netscape 4.77 and while the problem exists in both > environments, it is far worse in Konqueror. With > Konqueror, the fonts were almost unreadable (remember > this was only certain fonts on certain webpages). > > An example of a page that made fonts display poorly > for me is the following: > http://www.nvidia.com/Products/Drivers.nsf/Linux.html > > If anyone can check that page and report whether their > fonts are messed up too, that would be greatly > appreciated. Specifically, the narrative at the top > was very bad. > > I did edit /etc/X11/fs/config to list the 10
Re: [expert] 8.0 final --brakes MANY applications (Software Installeris first on that list)
I personally prefer Quantum hard drives, although I have not had any maxtors or WD, I know about IBM and Quantums being good linux drives. On Tuesday 24 April 2001 11:11 pm, so spoke Dan Swartzendruber: > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Mark Weaver wrote: > > Todd... > > > > What's wrong with Maxtor? Thats what I'm running now. in fact, that's all > > I've ever run with Linux. I've got two of them in my Mandrake 7.2 box > > here at home. 13GB and 3.5GB. this things runs for months at a time > > without any hiccups. I've got another machine that's an older Dell with a > > Quantum Fireball in it that's a screamer. > > > > but I love my Maxtors. > > ymmv. the only two head crashed drives i ever had were both maxtor :(
Re: [expert] 8.0 final --brakes MANY applications
I agree, I can't even burn the dang iso image, this sucks, Beavis uhh huh huh. both xcdroast and eroaster said: Warning: creating filesystem that does not conform to ISO-9660. Cdrecord 1.9 (i586-mandrake-linux-gnu) Copyright (C) 1995-2000 Jörg Schilling TOC Type: 1 = CD-ROM scsidev: '1,0,0' scsibus: 1 target: 0 lun: 0 Linux sg driver version: 2.1.39 Using libscg version 'schily-0.1' atapi: 1 Device type: Removable CD-ROM Version: 0 Response Format: 1 Vendor_info: 'PLEXTOR ' Identifikation : 'CD-R PX-W8432T' Revision : '1.07' Device seems to be: Generic mmc CD-RW. Using generic SCSI-3/mmc CD-R driver (mmc_cdr). Driver flags : SWABAUDIO Drive buf size : 4194304 = 4096 KB FIFO size : 4194304 = 4096 KB mkisofs 1.13 (i586-mandrake-linux-gnu) cdrecord: WARNING: Track size unknown. Data may not fit on disk. Track 01: data unknown length padsize: 30 KB Total size: 0 MB (00:00.00) = 0 sectors Lout start: 0 MB (00:02/00) = 0 sectors Current Secsize: 2048 ATIP info from disk: Indicated writing power: 5 Reference speed: 0 Is not unrestricted Is erasable ATIP start of lead in: -11635 (97:26/65) ATIP start of lead out: 337350 (75:00/00) speed low: 0 speed high: 4 power mult factor: 4 6 recommended erase/write power: 3 A2 values: 00 00 00 Disk type:Phase change Manuf. index: 3 Manufacturer: CMC Magnetics Corporation Starting to write CD/DVD at speed 4 in write mode for single session. Waiting for reader process to fill input buffer ... input buffer ready. Performing OPC... Starting new track at sector: 0 status: 0x2 (CHECK CONDITION) CDB: 2A 00 00 00 27 1D 00 00 1F 00 Sense Bytes: F0 00 03 00 00 27 B5 0A 00 00 00 00 0C 09 00 00 Sense Key: 0x3 Medium Error, Segment 0 Sense Code: 0x0C Qual 0x09 (write error - loss of streaming) Fru 0x0 Sense flags: Blk 10165 (valid) write track data: error after 20506624 bytes Sense Bytes: 70 00 00 00 00 00 00 0A 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Writing time: 52.766s Fixating... cdrecord: Input/output error. close track/session: scsi sendcmd: retryable error status: 0x2 (CHECK CONDITION) CDB: 5B 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Sense Bytes: F0 00 03 00 00 4B 4A 0A 00 00 00 00 0C 07 00 00 Sense Key: 0x3 Medium Error, Segment 0 Sense Code: 0x0C Qual 0x07 (write error - recovery needed) Fru 0x0 Sense flags: Blk 19274 (valid) cmd finished after 70.773s timeout 480s Fixating time: 70.788s cdrecord: Input/output error. mode select g1: scsi sendcmd: retryable error status: 0x2 (CHECK CONDITION) CDB: 55 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 10 00 Sense Bytes: 70 00 05 00 00 00 00 0A 00 00 00 00 26 00 00 00 Sense Key: 0x5 Illegal Request, Segment 0 Sense Code: 0x26 Qual 0x00 (invalid field in parameter list) Fru 0x0 Sense flags: Blk 0 (not valid) cmd finished after 0.000s timeout 40s cdrecord: fifo had 387 puts and 324 gets. cdrecord: fifo was 0 times empty and 297 times full, min fill was 95%. mkisofs: Broken pipe. cannot fwrite 32768*1 On Sunday 22 April 2001 05:17 pm, so spoke Eric Krout: >I'm not very impressed with what people are reporting about their experience >with the new stable release of Mandrake, version 8.0. Does anyone have >anything *good* to say about it? I might end up just sticking with my 7.2 >version, which I've updated with KDE 2.1.1 already. No sense dealing with >unnecessary hassle. >Thanks, >Eric
[expert] getting rm files off of the server
Hello all Does anyone know of a way to download and save files in the rtsp or pnm:// type scheme? Lynx can't do it, netscape nor konq, I wish to know of a way to just download and save files from these tyupes of servers. Thank you rtsp://a659.r.akareal.net/ondemand/7/659/2963/v0001/nick.download.akamai.com/2963/nick/all_nick/movies/rugrats_paris/rugrats_paris.rm Soemthing like this
Re: [expert] 8.0 Final
Cool, hey if anyone tries it out, would someone tell me if its worth upgrading to or not and why? Thanks On Thursday 19 April 2001 01:45 pm, so spoke Charles A Edwards: > 8.0 has been uploaded to many of the ftp mirrors, though not all as of yet. > 2 sites that do have it are: > > ftp://ftp.sunet.se/pub/Linux/distributions/mandrake/iso/Mandrake80 > > ftp.free.fr/pub/Distributions_Linux/Mandrake-iso/i586 > > All servers will be extremely busy. > It might be more expedient to wait a day or 2 before attempting > to download the ISOs and then to do so at an off peak time. > >Charles (-: > > Forever never goes beyond tomorrow.
Re: [expert] Lost sight of point (was: WAIT!! STOP!!...)
Its ok to have the i686 rpms in the version, just don't (whoever) remove the i586 ones, just add the i686 and leave the i586 IN there so one can install it on either machine and then everyone will be happy and the version won't give you any poop about installing, it will just install with no problems and complaining. On Friday 30 March 2001 08:15 am, so spoke Lyric: > The one thing that I'm noticing throughout this particular discussion is > that everyone is blaming Mandrake and not looking at the fact that the > K6-2 and K6-3 are actually i586 chips. > > How can Mandrake make their distribution recognize the K6 series as i686 > chips when they will just cough and sputter dring bootup it you try to run > i686 optimized code on them. > > This isn't Mandrake's problem. > > I would like to see Mandrake continue to bundle the i586 RPMs into the > distribution to retain some backward compatability, just because I also > run Mandrake on an old P233 that I have. But my primary machine is an AMD > Duron 600, which will make use of this new optimized code with no > problems. So I woudliek to see the benefits of theenhanced speed as well > as the ability to keep running the latest distributions on my 233. > > Thanks > > > "Jose M. Sanchez" wrote: > > > Eh, except 7.2 installs just fine on a P-90 and K5. > > > > > > It's only the 486 and 386's who are left out. > > > > > > The i586 vs i686 worries are somewhat ungrounded. > > > > > > The i586 code works best with the K6, etc. > > > > Jose, what will happen when the next full release of Mandrake appears? > > Will it install without complaint on the millions of K6-2s out there? > > Will there be 2 standard new releases, LM 8.x_i686 and LM8.x_i586? Will > > continued support of the K6-2 just be dropped? -- OR -- Will the core of > > the i686 install be made the properly recognize the K6-2. --OR-- Is > > there really a bit offset discrepancy that prevents the K6-2 from truly > > being included in the i686 frenzy? > > > > The foregoing is "the point" and it is a "worry" to a lot of people that > > rests on "solid" ground. > > > > -- > > David Rankin > > Nacogdoches, Texas
Re: [expert] Lost sight of point (was: WAIT!! STOP!!...)
So does this mean that the next ver of Mandrake will install on my AMDK6-400 without any trouble just like 7.2 ? If not I will be VERY upset On Friday 30 March 2001 12:51 am, so spoke David Rankin: > "Jose M. Sanchez" wrote: > > To begin with, this is not a Mandrake issue, it's a Linux issue. > > > > The K6 can execute i686 code, just not optimally for the processor. > > > > With the Kernel it's another matter altogether... > > > > The MTRR register differences PREVENTs the i686 compiled kernel to > > operate on a K6 afaik. > > > > When I tried it I got an kernel which would not fully init... > > > > That plus the byte alignment optimzations for the 686, make the i586 > > distro better for the K6 in terms of speed and compatibility. > > > > It's not a question of making the i686 distro, "properly" identify the > > k6... > > > > LINUX (as directed by Linus) "properly" identifies the K6 characteristics > > and classifies it as a i585 for optimal operation... > > > > There was quite an extensive thread about this some time ago in the > > kernel forums... > > > > It's also doubtful that MANDRAKE will alienate it's prospective clients. > > > > I wouldn't doubt that what they'll resort to doing is producing a common > > distro that installs a i586 kernel with i686 code RPM's... albeit with a > > slight loss of performance over i586 optimizations or a seperate i586 > > distro, as they've done for the i486. > > > > Given the perponderance of AMD's though, I'll bet they will choose the > > former as it makes good marketing sense... > > > > It would be pretty easy to implement in an installer... they already do > > this for SMP installations anyway... > > > > -JMS > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Well put Jose! I hope we see something like this come from Linus. Looking > down the "time horizon", this issue will probably dissapear in 8 to 12 > months, but in the interim, it just makes good business sense not to raise > potential obstacles to the further acceptance of Linux. > > -- > David Rankin > Nacogdoches, Texas
Re: [expert] Lost sight of point (was: WAIT!! STOP!!...)
HEAR!! HEAR!!! Well spoken! On Wednesday 28 March 2001 07:39 pm, so spoke Digital Wokan: > We've lost sight of one of my original points in similar discussions. > If Mandrake is a Pentium optimized distro and NOT a P2+ optimized > distro, then i686 RPM's HAVE NO PLACE in the distro. Period. They just > shouldn't be there. Never mind us annoyed K6-2 users. What about the > kid on his dad's old K5 or Pentium 166 who can't install something > because it's i686 compiled? > > "Jose M. Sanchez" wrote: > > Eh, no. > > Have you looked at the kernel code? > > Have you tried recompiling the kernel? (Did you read the HELP about this > > issue?) > > Linux utilizes the mtrr registers which differ between the i686 and the > > K6. The K6 and the i586 are a correct match according to the kernel mtrr > > handler. > > If you want optimal speed with your K6 you are better off using the i586 > > optimizations, otherwise the byte alignments for the i686 will also come > > into play... etc. > > -JMS > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Rankin > > Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 9:49 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: WAIT!! STOP!! Re: [expert] DON'T USE --ignorearch!!! > > > > Guys, this is a HUGE issue! There are millions of AMD K6-2s out > > there -- a > > large user base. I have one myself. If a new Mandrake i686 release > > doesn't > > properly recognize the architecture of these machines as i686 there will > > be a > > HUGE void in the potential user base for the new release. Not good for > > Mandrake.
WAIT!! STOP!! Re: [expert] DON'T USE --ignorearch!!!
Stop, Mandrake!!! You can't do that!! I still have a AMD K6 I need you guys to leave the i586 rpms IN the installation!! and I don't have the money to just go get a new i686 machine. Please do not exclude the i586 rpms from newer versions. I want to stay with Mandrake, I would hate to change dists again. On Tuesday 27 March 2001 01:28 am, so spoke Digital Wokan: > Someone tell that to the people who let the d*** i686 packages into > MandrakeFreq. > > Benjamin Sher wrote: > > Dear friends: > > I just an expert opinion on the --ignore command in rpm installations. > > E.g. > > #rpm -Uvh --ignorearch RealPlayer8.xxx.rpm > > My friend STRONGLY advises AGAINST using this command. He says that > > trying to get around the "different architecture" error message in this > > case is a hug mistake that will wipe out libraries and wreak havoc. > > So, do NOT use the --ignorearch way of installing an rpm file. > > Benjamin
[expert] any opinions on SBlive Platinum?
Hello. I am considering upgrading my sound card from AWE64 ISA to the SBLive Platinum. Does the wavetable midi still sound as good (or better) than the old awe64 or does it even use the same kind of synth? I should have asked if it works with linux to begin with in the first place sorry. If so, how do all you sblive users like it? Thanks
Re: [expert] Civilme: inquiring minds want to know
I have always thought it was "civil-me" as well and until I read how it was pronounced, the Turkish way and all. Good to know, I like learning new languages. I guess I just accepted it as I saw it, I know kind of childish, but thats how I am. hehe Cool On Sunday 25 March 2001 07:43 am, so spoke Tom Snell: > Jeeesh, I've been wondering about this myself for the past few years, > and, as are many things in life, the answer is far more intriguing than > the question! I always assumed it was Quebecois > > Tom > > Civileme wrote: > > Hmmm > > > > it is Civileme. You'd need a Turkish phonetic dictionary to get it > > right and also a mailer capable of seeing (and I'd need a font capable of > > showing) what appears to be the bottom of a figure 5 attached to the > > nadir of the C. > > > > It means "shout" or "smash"(sports) or "foot-first jump". I took it as a > > web handle to honor a departed four-footed friend, whose registered name > > was Masallah Civileme, one of the near-legendary livestock guardians of > > the Anatolian plateau. > > > > Civileme
Re: [expert] RPM -src
O COOL So there are two ways to do it, that rocks thanx for the extra info. On Saturday 24 March 2001 09:26 pm, so spoke Jerry Sternesky: > You can do an rpm -Uvh on the package and it will install the source to > /usr/source/RPMS. Then to build it go into /usr/source/RPMS/SPECS > Then rpm -ba --clean --rmsource > > Then based on your compile options a shirny new rpm should appear in one of > the sub dir's of /usr/source/RPMS/RPMS. Mine usually end up in i686 or > noarch. > > I usually do this when I have to change an option in the spec file, such as > turning on usb support for gpilot. > > Jerry S. > > On Saturday 24 March 2001 19:15, Stefaans Mostert wrote: > > hi all > > > > I was wondering what are the commands for installing from a src-rpm ? > > does it unpack it somewhere and you build it as normal? Or do you build > > the rpm and then install? > > > > Sorry but I am wacked by this one ;-) > > > > Stefaans
Re: [expert] I just don't "grep" this...
Boy that reply took more thought than the posters question. On Saturday 24 March 2001 04:47 am, so spoke Adam Litke: > RTFM > - Original Message - > From: "Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Expert List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 1:14 PM > Subject: [expert] I just don't "grep" this... > > > Hi list, > > > > I know I've used this utility before, but you know what?...I really have > > no idea for sure what the little bugger is. I've taken it for granted > > that it's in there and used it as I've seen it exampled. > > > > So, could someone provide a definitive explanation of just what exactly > > grep is, where I might find some real thorough information on usage and > > function on this wonder of hidden technology? > > > > thanks, > > > > Mark
