Hello,
The first patch changes chip erase method from JEDEC Chip Erase to JEDEC Sector
Erase for
each sector. See the comment in util/flashrom/sst49lf040.c, line #40. Verified
on a real
SST49LF080A chip, for which JEDEC Chip Erase did not work as well.
The second patch makes printf working [as
I have justboldly replaced the main wiki page with a new draft
[ --^ your mailer is still messing up, although slightly
differently than before ;-) ]
version I have been thinking about. It definately needs a bit more
work, but maybe you like it.
It's great, but someone needs to
version I have been thinking about. It definately needs a bit more
work, but maybe you like it.
It's great, but someone needs to complain, so
- The penguin in the About logo could be a bit bigger (just bleed/
crop it a bit if needed);
- It took me a while to realise the thing in
Hello,
I have LinuxBIOSv2-2228 on Tyan s2892 working fine. Recently, I tried v2434.
The system dies badly when an HT device (other than nVidia - unverified)
sends an HT Read Request Packet. The CPU never replies. Proven with a logic
analyzer. It was found that the newer LinuxBIOS misconfigures
On 10/10/2006 01:15 PM, Lu, Yinghai wrote:
There is some setting in the MB Options.lb
default HT_CHAIN_UNITID_BASE=0x0
default SB_HT_CHAIN_UNITID_OFFSET_ONLY=0
you can comment out them, if you like.
Thank you for the answer.
What are the options for?
Why did you put them in if they break
The option are used to put HT device on specific bus num and device
logic.
Are you testing new HT device on socket?
YH
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roman Kononov
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 11:29 AM
To: LinuxBIOS
Subject: Re:
On 10/10/2006 01:46 PM, Lu, Yinghai wrote:
The option are used to put HT device on specific bus num and device
logic.
How?
Are you testing new HT device on socket?
Yes, I am. And the code in get_bus_conf.c does not allow me to do
so unless I modify it to expect the PCI-X bridge on another
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 08:05:55PM -0600, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
we created it here at LANL. The license? What license should apply? What
do you recommend?
That's a good question. I'm not sure what's best-suited for a logo.
I'd say just put it under the GPL, if only for simplicity
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 11:24:26PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
http://www.linuxbios.org/index.php/Welcome_to_LinuxBIOS
Ah, while I'm at it, here's a few smaller suggestions for the wiki:
* Remove the index.php part from the URL (needs mod_rewrite
and editing of LocalSettings.php).
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 12:40:18PM -0500, David H. Barr wrote:
Just to point out something trivial, I thought I'd point out that
Internet Explorer 6's broken .png implementation does not render those
front page images consistently; that is to say, some of those images
render with a black
Sigh. I'll try to figure out what's going on...
Heh :-)
- The penguin in the About logo could be a bit bigger (just bleed/
crop it a bit if needed);
Done.
Just a little bit more :-)
- It took me a while to realise the thing in the Developers logo is
meant to be a keyboard;
I
11 matches
Mail list logo
