Mike,
I am sorry I was so jumpy with the description of my problem. Let me
elaborate some more. I have two NIC's, a PCI Card Intel PRO/100 and an
onboard Intel PRO/100. The onboard NIC is giving the following kernel
error:
/kernel: fxp1: warning: unsupported PHY, type = 17, addr = 2
Yes, the ca
I've asked about this several times and was beaten silly by Wes Peters and
Co. . It seems that they dont like to be bothered by the thousands of
people suffering from a driver that is not up to date (linux and netbsd
were fixed months ago)..they are way too busy working on 5.0 or
something els
Dennis,
You need to work with the maintainer of the driver on issues like
this, and as you have found out that is David Greenman.
If you have any issues regarding that, him or the result thereof,
address your email to core.
Under *NO* circumstances is behaviour like this acceptable.
You have
>I've asked about this several times and was beaten silly by Wes Peters and
>Co. . It seems that they dont like to be bothered by the thousands of
>people suffering from a driver that is not up to date (linux and netbsd
>were fixed months ago)..they are way too busy working on 5.0 or
>somethin
At 08:07 PM 3/27/00 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>Dennis,
>
>You need to work with the maintainer of the driver on issues like
>this, and as you have found out that is David Greenman.
Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
maintainers dont maintain if complaining
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dennis writes:
>At 08:07 PM 3/27/00 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>
>>Dennis,
>>
>>You need to work with the maintainer of the driver on issues like
>>this, and as you have found out that is David Greenman.
>
>Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does o
> As for "thousands of people people suffering from a driver that is not
>up-to-date", I think you are *way* overstating the breadth of the problem.
>I'll also point out that hundreds of thousands of people find the fxp driver
>a lifesaver and one of the best functioning network drivers in the
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
> If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
> point.
> Plus I've already fixed it myself. So if you fix it its not for me at all.
Since you appear to have fixed the problems and updated the code,
would you like to submit
David Greenman wrote:
>
> ...
Hi David,
you wrote that you have trouble finding a person
with Intel 82559 based NIC (regular or onboard),
I am willing to assist you as much as I can
to solve this problem.
I alredy looked at the code in FBSD v3.4R and tried
to create workaround a patch for my c
> Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
> maintainers dont maintain if complaining isnt allowed?
Fix it yourself. If you don't know how or don't have the time - tough
luck. Buy a support contract or use a commercial OS.
> Yes, lets silence the critics. Nice way to r
At 03:08 PM 3/27/00 -0500, Andy wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
>
>> If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
>> point.
>
>> Plus I've already fixed it myself. So if you fix it its not for me at all.
>
> Since you appear to have fixed the problems a
> If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
> point.
Sure. Nobody will complain if you start working on it!
> Its an important driver. People get upset when they can't run full-duplex
> mode. It makes linux MUCH more attractive when you can run your $39. card
> at
>If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
>point.
PLEASE, someone else fix the driver!!! Please, please, please!!!
There, did that help? Probably not. I don't know what point you're trying
to make. The driver isn't fixed because noone to this point has had b
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Blaz Zupan wrote:
> > Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
> > maintainers dont maintain if complaining isnt allowed?
>
> Fix it yourself. If you don't know how or don't have the time - tough
> luck. Buy a support contract or use a commercial O
:At 03:08 PM 3/27/00 -0500, Andy wrote:
:>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
:>
:>> If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
:>> point.
:>
:>> Plus I've already fixed it myself. So if you fix it its not for me at all.
:>
:> Since you appear to have fixed the pr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dennis writes:
>At 03:08 PM 3/27/00 -0500, Andy wrote:
>>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
>>
>>> If you dont have time then perhaps someone else should do it. THATS the
>>> point.
>>
>>> Plus I've already fixed it myself. So if you fix it its not for me at all.
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dennis writes:
: I would, except as we speak Poul-Henning Kamp is trying to have my posts
: censored,so they dont seem to want my help.
Bullshit. I've not seen anything in phk's mail that suggests that he
wants your posts censored. He merely requests that you cond
At 11:08 PM 3/27/00 +0100, Paul Robinson wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Blaz Zupan wrote:
>
>> > Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
>> > maintainers dont maintain if complaining isnt allowed?
>>
>> Fix it yourself. If you don't know how or don't have the time - toug
At 02:22 PM 3/27/00 -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dennis writes:
>: I would, except as we speak Poul-Henning Kamp is trying to have my posts
>: censored,so they dont seem to want my help.
>
>Bullshit. I've not seen anything in phk's mail that suggests that he
>wants yo
Dennis,
Your statement is false.
Poul-Henning has NOT asked me to filter you from the lists.
No one has (recently?) asked me to filter you from the lists. I do
not believe that I have ever filtered you from the lists.
as postmaster, i am responsible for spam filtering
:My "attitude" is irrelevant. I got called "lazy and incompetent" last week
:for simply asking if it had been fixed. The guy who asked the same question
:today didnt get flamed. So its not what is said, its who says it.
Attitude is significant, since you are dealing with people who are under
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Paul Robinson was heard blurting out:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Blaz Zupan wrote:
>
> > > Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
> > > maintainers dont maintain if complaining isnt allowed?
> >
> > Fix it yourself. If you don't know how or don't ha
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
> So its not what is said, its who says it.
No, that isn't true. As my Mum would say, it's not what you say, it's the
*way* that you say it.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Dennis wrote:
>
...
> >
> > Since you appear to have fixed the problems and updated the code,
> >would you like to submit it for review?
>
> I would, except as we speak Poul-Henning Kamp is trying to have my posts
> censored,so they dont seem to want my help.
>
> Hint: Look at the netbs
>At the moment I have a spare machine
>and the NIC available for testing.
>
>Please let me know if you are interested
>in my offer to test your patches to 4.0 driver?
Thanks, Milon. I've attached patches which I believe will fix the problem
as seen with the Compaq cards/motherboards, SuperMicr
> Been there, done that...tired of waiting. What does one do when the
> maintainers dont maintain if complaining isnt allowed?
Fix it yourself. You know that already though and have known it for
years, so we can safely assume that this is simply more of the usual
Dennis emotion-over-logic behavi
Ron 'The InSaNe One' Rosson wrote:
>
> Ummm This is getting a little old. I am no programmer but read this
> list to get insight on what things may not work or what might work.. It
> has saved my BACKSIDE many times. I am also a user of ETinc hardware and
> am aware of Dennis. I am also like
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Wes Peters was heard blurting out:
> Ron 'The InSaNe One' Rosson wrote:
> >
> > Ummm This is getting a little old. I am no programmer but read this
> > list to get insight on what things may not work or what might work.. It
> > has saved my BACKSIDE many times. I am also
>> Its an important driver. People get upset when they can't run full-duplex
>> mode. It makes linux MUCH more attractive when you can run your $39. card
>> at twice the speed.
>
>I run the Intel Etherexpress in full duplex without any problems.
obviously not the one that has the error. Are you
> >I run the Intel Etherexpress in full duplex without any problems.
> obviously not the one that has the error. Are you paying attention?
Of course I do, I just wanted to point out that you are generalizing. "The
Intel Etherexpress does not work on FreeBSD" is not true - it works for
me. There a
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 07:18:57AM -0800, Ron Rosson wrote:
>
> It is the go fix it yourself attitude I guess that gets me sometimes in
> both the mailing lists and IRC. There is some people in the user base
> that can not code but are able to find issues on there systems and would
> like to shar
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dennis writes:
: I passed on the info to DG on how to fix it. Work I do belongs to my
: company because they pay me to do it. I know few of you understand that, So
: unless you want to attach the "copyright Emerging Technologies" to the
: driver you cant use it.
You
:>
:>Have you contributed the fix to FreeBSD? I think I know the answer.
:
:I passed on the info to DG on how to fix it. Work I do belongs to my
:company because they pay me to do it. I know few of you understand that, So
:unless you want to attach the "copyright Emerging Technologies" to the
:dri
Dennis wrote:
> obviously not the one that has the error. Are you paying attention?
DG has just committed a fix for this. Are *YOU* paying attention?
> I passed on the info to DG on how to fix it. Work I do belongs to my
> company because they pay me to do it. I know few of you understand that,
At 05:04 PM 3/28/00 +0100, you wrote:
>Dennis wrote:
>
>> obviously not the one that has the error. Are you paying attention?
>
>DG has just committed a fix for this. Are *YOU* paying attention?
Good, then we can end this stupid thread.
If you fellows put as much time into freebsd as you do fla
It takes two to flame, really it does.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dennis writes:
>At 05:04 PM 3/28/00 +0100, you wrote:
>>Dennis wrote:
>>
>>> obviously not the one that has the error. Are you paying attention?
>>
>>DG has just committed a fix for this. Are *YOU* paying attention?
>
>Good, t
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 07:18:57AM -0800, Ron Rosson wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Wes Peters was heard blurting out:
>
> > Ron 'The InSaNe One' Rosson wrote:
> > >
> > > Ummm This is getting a little old. I am no programmer but read this
> > > list to get insight on what things may not work
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
>
> If you fellows put as much time into freebsd as you do flaming me we
> wouldnt need this crap. :-)
>
*Plonk!*
Brian Beattie| This email was produced using professional quality,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | standards based software. Users of Micr
David Greenman wrote:
>
> >At the moment I have a spare machine
> >and the NIC available for testing.
> >
> >Please let me know if you are interested
> >in my offer to test your patches to 4.0 driver?
>
>Thanks, Milon. I've attached patches which I believe will fix the problem
> as seen with
>The only thing remaining is that the card is reported as
>Intel EtherExpress Pro 10/100B (which used to have i82557),
>but it's a card with i82559.
>
>This can be detected by reading the revision code of
>integrated PHY (registers 2 and 3) through MDI in CSR space
>(pg. 87 in i82559 datasheet or
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
OK, personally, I've had enough of reading this. This strikes me as Troll,
and I think Dennis has lost it, but I actaully *want* the following in the
archives...
I have never submitted code to FreeBSD because somebody else has usually
already beaten me to it, n
>> obviously not the one that has the error. Are you paying attention?
>
>You really are an arrogant prat aren't you. How do you know it's the same
>one? Have you asked him? Let me guess.. you're *assuming* aren't you.
Wait, so we were talking about the "newer" intel boards not being fully
suppo
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
> So, it is clear that you too are not paying attention, yet you seem to have
> an opinion regarding things that you also know little about. Dont browbeat
> me for putting down some dope who doesnt know what hes talking about who
> feels compelled to voice an o
Maybe I got lost in the hub-bub, but I am still having trouble getting my
onboard NIC to work, still get unsupported phy errors.
When you say its fixed are you refering to the patch the DG sent out the
other day, or your patch. I applied DG's patch and the problem still
exists. And I cant compil
Dear Dennis,
The reason Poul-Henning Kamp threatened to filter you is because you were
insulting people (and yes, in response they insult you too). He did not do
so because you were critisizing FreeBSD's method of working. Many have done
that without getting threatening remarks from Poul-Henning
At 04:26 PM 3/29/00 +0100, Paul Robinson wrote:
>On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Dennis wrote:
>
>> So, it is clear that you too are not paying attention, yet you seem to have
>> an opinion regarding things that you also know little about. Dont browbeat
>> me for putting down some dope who doesnt know what
>Maybe I got lost in the hub-bub, but I am still having trouble getting my
>onboard NIC to work, still get unsupported phy errors.
>
>When you say its fixed are you refering to the patch the DG sent out the
>other day, or your patch. I applied DG's patch and the problem still
>exists. And I cant
47 matches
Mail list logo
