Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:"Barry K. Nathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> In any case, tulips have been more problematic for me than 8139, pcnet32,
> or 3c905c (whose reliability are all comparable IME). I've never tried
> eepro100, though. (Also, I
Andrew Morton wrote:
> The 3c905C is a well manufactured and very feature-rich NIC which at
> present appears to have fewer problem reports than eepro100, 8139 or tulip.
3c905c is a bit expensive, though. pcnet32 cards also work very well for
me, and are less expensive. The 905c could be a better
2 matches
Mail list logo
