Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometimes the controller comes up
;) I tried my own kernel (by changing the IDE delay), it didn't work.
-biju
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-hack...@freebsd.
> Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
> When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometimes the controller comes up
> ;) I tried my own kernel (by changing the IDE delay), it didn't work.
> -biju
Normally for my own kernel, I set the IDE delay very low
llian Sharkey
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 4:28 PM
To: b...@wipinfo.soft.net
Cc: hack...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
> Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
> When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometime
> I tried with delay 12000, 6000, 8000 (I admit that i really don't know how
> this
> delay helps) but no use... only putting a CD in the drive while booting helps.
>
> -biju
I just set IDE_DELAY=4000 in my 3.2-STABLE kernel, and now it sees all disks
on both controllers. I think the problem was
>
> > I tried with delay 12000, 6000, 8000 (I admit that i really
> don't know how this
> > delay helps) but no use... only putting a CD in the drive
> while booting helps.
> >
> > -biju
>
> I just set IDE_DELAY=4000 in my 3.2-STABLE kernel, and now it
> sees all disks
> on both controllers. I thi
hi,
I tried yesterday to make the kernel understand my CD ROM drive.. but it
refused. Here is the dmesg (of boot -v)... is my config wrong or i missed
something? The drive is Acer 32X and connected as secondary slave. It is seen by
Win98 and BIOS. Can someone help?
And what does "ide_pci: gener
On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Biju Susmer wrote:
> hi,
> I tried yesterday to make the kernel understand my CD ROM drive.. but it
> refused. Here is the dmesg (of boot -v)... is my config wrong or i missed
> something? The drive is Acer 32X and connected as secondary slave. It is seen
> by
> Win98 and BI
When moving the CDROM to master though can cause problems. I had a
Chaintech 5TDM board which refused to acknowledge a CDROM as secondary
master. I thought it was a bug in FBSD since RH Linux could detect my
CDROM as a secondary slave (only device on the controller). I never got
a straight answe
Chris wrote:
>
> When moving the CDROM to master though can cause problems. I had a
> Chaintech 5TDM board which refused to acknowledge a CDROM as secondary
> master. I thought it was a bug in FBSD since RH Linux could detect my
> CDROM as a secondary slave (only device on the controller). I ne
> Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
>
I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse this configuration?
When i was us
Biju Susmer wrote:
>
> > Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> > controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
> >
> I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
> configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse t
On 06-Aug-99 Wes Peters wrote:
> Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of the spec. Why
> should we waste valuable developer time trying to support mis-configured
> hardware?
Since when has PC hardware followed the specs?
---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
f
On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 06-Aug-99 Wes Peters wrote:
> > Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of the spec. Why
> > should we waste valuable developer time trying to support mis-configured
> > hardware?
>
> Since when has PC hardware followed the s
>
> Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of
> the spec. Why
> should we waste valuable developer time trying to support
> mis-configured
> hardware?
>
The box was shipped to me this way.. i'm no a hardware expert to know
the IDE
specs. As far as i know, it work for Win
On 06-Aug-99 Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> > Since when has PC hardware followed the specs?
> Since it was made to work? The problem here is that this person, for some
> reason, is misconfiguring their system and expecting it to work as if it
> were configured properly.
Sure but a lot of PC's are
> OK, i went to net and got this page
> (http://www.mit.edu/afs/sipb.mit.edu/project/linux/docs/faq/AT
> API-FAQ) there
> also they say it should be MASTER. Problem is not with me.
> The vendor didn't
> follow the specs. PC never followd specs i think ;)
>
> Some one please put this in an FAQ (if
It seems Biju Susmer wrote:
> > OK, i went to net and got this page
> > (http://www.mit.edu/afs/sipb.mit.edu/project/linux/docs/faq/AT
> > API-FAQ) there
> > also they say it should be MASTER. Problem is not with me.
> > The vendor didn't
> > follow the specs. PC never followd specs i think ;)
> >
Wes Peters wrote:
>
> Biju Susmer wrote:
> >
> > > Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> > > controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
> > >
> > I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
> > configuration without any
In message <001201bedfb8$92fa3440$88291...@wipro.tcpn.com> "Biju Susmer" writes:
: I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
: configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse this configuration?
: When i was using 2.2.7-stable, FBSD used to recognize my CDRO
In message
"Brian
F. Feldman" writes:
: Since it was made to work? The problem here is that this person, for some
: reason, is misconfiguring their system and expecting it to work as if it
: were configured properly.
Odd, all of the machines that I've seen shipped lately have their
CDROMs on a s
In message <37ab8b48.4a791...@tig.com.au> Chris writes:
: As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
: then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
I'd love to see chapter and verse on this :-)
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with
On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 11:15:25PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
#> In message <37ab8b48.4a791...@tig.com.au> Chris writes:
#> : As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
#> : then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
#>
#> I'd love to see chapter and verse o
>
> Odd, all of the machines that I've seen shipped lately have their
> CDROMs on a secondary IDE controller as SLAVE with no master. Works
> great, and the FreeBSD drivers work well when hacked to not require
> a master fo there to be a slave
i commented out one line in wd.c, wdprobe() and i
Hi folks,
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion could
have a look at PR 13174 and comment? The originator claim
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the
recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion
could
have a look at PR 13174 and co
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the
recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion
could
have a look at PR 13174 and co
Chris wrote:
>
> I am glad to hear from Soren that this 'misconfiguration' will be
> supported in 4.0
> As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
> then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
Old message, but still in need for reply.
Yeah, like isa shared
Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometimes the controller comes up
;) I tried my own kernel (by changing the IDE delay), it didn't work.
-biju
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EM
> Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
> When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometimes the controller comes up
> ;) I tried my own kernel (by changing the IDE delay), it didn't work.
> -biju
Normally for my own kernel, I set the IDE delay very lo
ugust 03, 1999 4:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
> Yes, i'm also facing the same problem in 3.2 stable (wdc1 not found at 0x170).
> When i put a CD-ROM (ATAPI, secondary slave) sometimes the controller comes up
> ;) I trie
> I tried with delay 12000, 6000, 8000 (I admit that i really don't know how this
> delay helps) but no use... only putting a CD in the drive while booting helps.
>
> -biju
I just set IDE_DELAY=4000 in my 3.2-STABLE kernel, and now it sees all disks
on both controllers. I think the problem was th
>
> > I tried with delay 12000, 6000, 8000 (I admit that i really
> don't know how this
> > delay helps) but no use... only putting a CD in the drive
> while booting helps.
> >
> > -biju
>
> I just set IDE_DELAY=4000 in my 3.2-STABLE kernel, and now it
> sees all disks
> on both controllers. I th
hi,
I tried yesterday to make the kernel understand my CD ROM drive.. but it
refused. Here is the dmesg (of boot -v)... is my config wrong or i missed
something? The drive is Acer 32X and connected as secondary slave. It is seen by
Win98 and BIOS. Can someone help?
And what does "ide_pci: gene
On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Biju Susmer wrote:
> hi,
> I tried yesterday to make the kernel understand my CD ROM drive.. but it
> refused. Here is the dmesg (of boot -v)... is my config wrong or i missed
> something? The drive is Acer 32X and connected as secondary slave. It is seen by
> Win98 and BIOS
When moving the CDROM to master though can cause problems. I had a
Chaintech 5TDM board which refused to acknowledge a CDROM as secondary
master. I thought it was a bug in FBSD since RH Linux could detect my
CDROM as a secondary slave (only device on the controller). I never got
a straight answ
Chris wrote:
>
> When moving the CDROM to master though can cause problems. I had a
> Chaintech 5TDM board which refused to acknowledge a CDROM as secondary
> master. I thought it was a bug in FBSD since RH Linux could detect my
> CDROM as a secondary slave (only device on the controller). I n
> Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
>
I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse this configuration?
When i was u
Biju Susmer wrote:
>
> > Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> > controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
> >
> I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
> configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse
On 06-Aug-99 Wes Peters wrote:
> Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of the spec. Why
> should we waste valuable developer time trying to support mis-configured
> hardware?
Since when has PC hardware followed the specs?
---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 06-Aug-99 Wes Peters wrote:
> > Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of the spec. Why
> > should we waste valuable developer time trying to support mis-configured
> > hardware?
>
> Since when has PC hardware followed the
>
> Because it's wrong. If you don't believe me, buy a copy of
> the spec. Why
> should we waste valuable developer time trying to support
> mis-configured
> hardware?
>
The box was shipped to me this way.. i'm no a hardware expert to know the IDE
specs. As far as i know, it work for Win
On 06-Aug-99 Brian F. Feldman wrote:
> > Since when has PC hardware followed the specs?
> Since it was made to work? The problem here is that this person, for some
> reason, is misconfiguring their system and expecting it to work as if it
> were configured properly.
Sure but a lot of PC's are
> OK, i went to net and got this page
> (http://www.mit.edu/afs/sipb.mit.edu/project/linux/docs/faq/AT
> API-FAQ) there
> also they say it should be MASTER. Problem is not with me.
> The vendor didn't
> follow the specs. PC never followd specs i think ;)
>
> Some one please put this in an FAQ (if
It seems Biju Susmer wrote:
> > OK, i went to net and got this page
> > (http://www.mit.edu/afs/sipb.mit.edu/project/linux/docs/faq/AT
> > API-FAQ) there
> > also they say it should be MASTER. Problem is not with me.
> > The vendor didn't
> > follow the specs. PC never followd specs i think ;)
>
Wes Peters wrote:
>
> Biju Susmer wrote:
> >
> > > Regardless, you have to have 1 master and 0 or 1 slaves one every IDE
> > > controller. You can't run a controller with just a slave.
> > >
> > I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
> > configuration without an
In message <001201bedfb8$92fa3440$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Biju Susmer" writes:
: I dont think it should be a problem.. Since other OSs can work with this
: configuration without any problem, why FBSD should refuse this configuration?
: When i was using 2.2.7-stable, FBSD used to recognize my CDROM *so
In message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Brian
F. Feldman" writes:
: Since it was made to work? The problem here is that this person, for some
: reason, is misconfiguring their system and expecting it to work as if it
: were configured properly.
Odd, all of the machines that I've seen shipped lately have
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chris writes:
: As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
: then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
I'd love to see chapter and verse on this :-)
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe
On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 11:15:25PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
#> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chris writes:
#> : As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
#> : then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
#>
#> I'd love to see chapter and verse on this :-)
>
> Odd, all of the machines that I've seen shipped lately have their
> CDROMs on a secondary IDE controller as SLAVE with no master. Works
> great, and the FreeBSD drivers work well when hacked to not require
> a master fo there to be a slave
i commented out one line in wd.c, wdprobe() and
Hi folks,
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion could
have a look at PR 13174 and comment? The originator claim
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the
recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion
could
have a look at PR 13174 and co
I didn't see any pointers other than pilot error raised in the
recent
thread with subject line:
Subject: Re: IDE quirk in 3.2-STABLE kernel ?
Perhaps those of you who're in support of the pilot error notion
could
have a look at PR 13174 and co
Chris wrote:
>
> I am glad to hear from Soren that this 'misconfiguration' will be
> supported in 4.0
> As always when a misconfiguration (read 'not to spec') is used enough
> then it quickly becomes somewhat of a de facto standard.
Old message, but still in need for reply.
Yeah, like isa share
54 matches
Mail list logo
