Hello Philipp, On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Philipp Lehman wrote:
> Doesn't the hisax driver need a 'type' and a 'protocol' statement? > That would mean > > options hisax type=11 protocol=2 io=0x200 irq=10 > > for the ISA card and > > options hisax type=11 protocol=2 > > for the PCI version, assuming Euro ISDN as the protocol (not sure if > this actually applies to the UK). > See /usr/src/linux/Documentation/isdn/README.eicon for details. Yes! I knew these cards did work. So I went back to a 2.2.17 kernel to see what was happening. They both gave a correct response on 2.2.17, and showed that no card was registered because I had omitted the type=11. The protocol=2 is unnecessary because EURO is the default. With these on a 2.2.17 kernel they worked. I then rebooted 2.2.19pre17 on the machine with the ISA card properly configured under 2.2.17, and got a kernel crash: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 81009f8c And other such paging errors bringing the kernel tracing into play. There seems to be something inherantly broken about the kernel-image-2.2.19pre17 and kernel-image-2.2.19 on Debian 2.2r3 Another thing I have found is that installing these kernels using apt-get from the 2.2r3 CDs gives a kernel booting with an error stated by ps as being a kernel map file which does not match the kernel. this is probably the cause of the paging errors found on trying to boot with the hisax driver loading. The hisax driver did indeed load properly according to the boot messages, but then I got the paging errors. > Can't help with the certificate, although I'm getting the same message > with kernel 2.2.19 and an Elsa card. I believe that this is a legal > issue, though, and that it won't affect the driver's functionality. I think this is again something to do with the broken nature of the kernel in Debian 2.2r3. I have got the Debian source for 2.2.19, and also the source from the kernel project, and I will compare them next week if I can find the time to compare and compile both sources. This has been the first time in many years of using Debian that I have found a fundamental instability in a "stable" release. I suspect something has been corrupted in the that kernel package. For the time being I have got the ISDN firewall router running properly on kernel 2.2.17 which I know from past experience is a very stable kernel. I am also quickly changing the default kernel on this workstation to use 2.2.17 until I can figure out what is wrong with 2.2.19 and 2.2.19pre17. Now of course I am going to have to learn how to submit a Debian bug report, because this is the first time I have needed to, and I have been using Debian since version 1 (I was using Slackware before that). It has not shaken my confidence in Debian because I have been using Debian intensively for all these years on various machines for all sorts of purposes, and this is the first real problem I have had (apart from a minor y2k bug I found in one machine running Debian 2.0 Hamm over the year 2000 turn - which was too minor to count - especially as it fixed itself after a reboot). Debian can be proud of the fact that this is the first real problem I have ever had with a Debian release. I might try 2.4.7 on the workstation, and leave 2.2.17 on the firewall router. I don't want 2.4.x on the firewall because I have a good set of ipchains definitions for that machine, and I don't want to mess around converting it all to iptables until I have some free time to learn the new system. Many thanks, Helen McCall -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
