RE: [newbie] RAID controller support in LM8?
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Paul RodrÃguez wrote: If it's not too much trouble, could you take a look at this motherboard and tell me what you think? http://store.yahoo.com/thechipmerchant/3485-1.html OK, but I would suggest the A7V133 for a couple of reasons 1) ALiMAGiK chipset has not garnered a lot of praise (though neither has VIA, but it has at least been around long enough to start maturing, better BIOS, etc) 2) The A7V133 has a RAID0/ATA100 controller so you can hook up to 8 IDE devices to the motherboard. By default the Promise controller on the A7V is set to ATA100 support and this most likely what you want under Linux. 3) Cheaper Compare back to back http://www.asus.com.tw/products/Motherboard/socketa/a7a266/spec.html http://www.asus.com.tw/products/Motherboard/socketa/a7v133/spec.html People might argue that the A7A266 has slots for DDR RAM, but the benchmarks so far do not indicate that having DDR RAM gives a significant improvement in speed (yet). You can't use both DDR (PC2100) and PC133 simultaneously with the A7A266. The following is a similar one I found on www.linhardware.com , it's the A7M not the A7A above (not sure of the difference). http://lhd.zdnet.com/db/dispproduct.php3?DISP?2676 I provide the link because it has some more spec info that might be useful. http://www.asus.com.tw/products/Motherboard/socketa/a7m266/spec.html The A7M266 uses DDR RAM and has the VIA chipset. It supports up to 2GB of RAM (the A7V supports 1.5GB, and the A7A 3GB, though I have never personally heard of a 1GB stick of RAM, but maybe they exist). All of these boards support 266/200Mhz FSB. I have a 1.2GHz AMD running on the A7V133 and am very pleased with it, in particularly the feature/price ratio. The extra ATA100 controller is welcome when you have 2 CD-ROMS, a ZIP, and 3 IDE drives. But, people may have good arguments why you should pay $15-$25 more for the A7A266 (DDR RAM support maybe ...) Albion Albion E. Baucom http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~baucom
[newbie] Nvidia Driver Set 1.0.1: FSAA Undocumented
After having problems with the Nvida driver installation I could not get fullscreen antialiasing (FSAA) to work with the new drivers. After doing quite a few tweaks and checking and re-checking my installation and configuration I e-mailed Nvidia and got the following responce: There was a change in the FSAA with the 1251 drivers that didnt get updated with the documentation. The __GL_FSAA_QUALITY variable is no longer correct. It is now __GL_FSAA_MODE. Setting it to 3 will enable 1.5x1.5, and setting it to 4 with enable 2x2. Any other value for your card will not provide FSAA. This is an undocumented change in the drivers and may interest those who have upgraded and then lost some functionality. My system specs are below for those interested: AMD 1.333GHz 266 A7M266 Geforce2 GTS 64MB Mandrake Linux 7.2 Kernel 2.2.17-21mdk XFree86 Version 4.0.3 FSAA is great feature of these drivers and makes onscreen 3D modeling look incredible. Albion Albion E. Baucom http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~baucom
[newbie] Package Problems (Nvidia Drivers)
Upon upgrading from the 0.9-769 Nvidia drivers I encoutered a problem which I have not been able to resolve. A pre-uninstall query of my RPM database gives the following: rpm -q NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-769 NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-769 rpm -q NVIDIA_GLX-0.9-769 NVIDIA_GLX-0.9-769 Fine. Looks good. Then rpm -e NVIDIA_GLX-0.9-769 No problem. Gone. Then rpm -e NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-769 execution of NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-769 script failed, exit status 1 Oops. Something has gone awry. So I thought, well, maybe something minor so I tried installing the 1.0-1251 Nvidia drivers rpm -ivh NVIDIA_kernel-1.0-1251.i686.rpm file /lib/modules/2.2.17-21mdk/video/NVdriver from install of \ NVIDIA_kernel-1.0-1251 conflicts with file from package \ NVIDIA_kernel-0.9-769 I removed the NVdriver module, but rpm claims that file still exists even though it does not. So, I have some kind of conflict. rpm --rebuilddb does not help, nor a --force with the new drivers. This just creates two Nvidia-kernel packages which causes the package managers to complain (though I have done all of the above at a command prompt). I have been following the threads on package problems and Nvidia, but they didnt seem exactly relevant. Is there a way to extract the contents of the rpm so examine the script and see what is does or what it is choking on? Any suggestions? Thanks Albion Albion E. Baucom http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~baucom
