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'm speaking in terms of my experiences across
> all OS's which I've used the cards under, not just under Linux, although
> my Linux experiences are similar to the experiences I've had overall.)
>
I have used eepro100's on *a lot* of boxes, including *.kernel.org;
haven't had any problems whatsoever any time recently.
-hpa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at work, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
