HT in the BIOS and tried to boot the new
kernel. It then failed to recognize my SCSI host adapter, or rather,
stated that it tried to use IRQ 0:
PCI: Enabling device 02:0a.0 ( -> 0003)
PCI: No IRQ known for interrupt pin A of device 02:0a.0. Please try using
pci=biosirq.
sym.2.10.0:
On Mon, Sep 15, 1997 at 01:11:07PM +0100, Paolo Ciliegi wrote:
>
> I'm using a DEBIAN Linux version 1.1.
> I installed an AVA 1505 AT-to-SCSI host adapter.
> Do you know where I can find a driver for this
> SCSI host adapter ?
> Thanks
> Paolo
If my guess is right
I'm using a DEBIAN Linux version 1.1.
I installed an AVA 1505 AT-to-SCSI host adapter.
Do you know where I can find a driver for this
SCSI host adapter ?
Thanks
Paolo
---
Paolo Ciliegi| Phone
On Tue, Sep 09, 1997 at 09:37:27PM -0700, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > "F" == F Potorti writes:
>
> F> I am resending this, this time to the mailing list. I suspect
> F> that the list-group gateway is not bidirectional, is that true?
>
> F> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Noxon) writes:
> "F" == F Potorti writes:
F> I am resending this, this time to the mailing list. I suspect
F> that the list-group gateway is not bidirectional, is that true?
F> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Noxon) writes:
F> If you think going buslogic, the following are very recommended
I am resending this, this time to the mailing list. I suspect that
the list-group gateway is not bidirectional, is that true?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Noxon) writes:
Note that the non-CPU FlashPoint models are the only ones available
with twin-bus configurations. BusLogic is marketing t
THANK YOU SO MUCH for all infos, I won't miss the doc and WEB site
you suggested (I also think they will deal with possible/real transfer
rates, of course related to the kind of hard disk or other device you
connect to the card).
Cheers.
Nicola Bernardelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Nicola Bernardelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There was mention of a specific model, Buslogic BT-948: is it such a
> "low-end" card or one with that CPU onboard?
The BT-948 and all other "MultiMaster" models have onboard CPUs. The 948
is BusLogic's equivalent to the Adaptec 2940U. The 95
BusLogic supports free software and is well supported under Linux?
Very well. Probably I'll have one customer of mine buy new machines very
soon, they will buy what I say. (Maybe me too - going to buy a new
harddisk - will replace my Adaptec 2940 with a BusLogic instead of a
2940UW or 3940W o
On Wed, 3 Sep 1997 09:27:41 -0700 (PDT), Steve Witt wrote:
>I'm hoping that someone with some SCSI experience can give me some
>advice here.
Look no further...you may accept my recommandation as the word of god.
Buy a DPT. If a DPT is too expensive, buy a Buslogic. End of choices.
(Don't buy ada
Steve Witt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm hoping that someone with some SCSI experience can give me some
> advice here.
My general impression is that the three best manufacturers to consider
are Buslogic, Adaptec, and for really serious SCSI, DPT. I've always
used Adaptec, but that's just bec
I endorsed.
Jeff Noxon wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 03, 1997 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Steve Witt wrote:
> [snip]
> > I've read the SCSI HOW-TO and it seems to highly recommend the Buslogic
> > series of boards. All of my Windows friends tell me that the Adaptec
> > boards are the only way to go. In looki
> My questions are: Is the Buslogic board really better than the Adaptec?
A hardware is good when the driver is stable.
> Is the Buslogic better supported in Linux than the Adaptec? Is the
> difference worth it?
yes.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
On Wed, Sep 03, 1997 at 09:27:41AM -0700, Steve Witt wrote:
[snip]
> I've read the SCSI HOW-TO and it seems to highly recommend the Buslogic
> series of boards. All of my Windows friends tell me that the Adaptec
> boards are the only way to go. In looking at my normal stores, both local
This is
I'm hoping that someone with some SCSI experience can give me some
advice here. I'm contemplating buying a SyJet 1.5 GB drive and need to
get a SCSI host adapter as this will be the first SCSI peripheral I have
installed on this machine (Dell 200 MHz PPro). Basically, I'm havi
On Thu, 24 Jul 1997, David M wrote:
> > > Plug and Play SCAM support
> > > --
> > > The default setting is disabled. They mention in the manual that if
> > > enabled than SCSI ID are automatically assigned to those SCSI devices
> > > that support SCAM. Those that don't
> > Plug and Play SCAM support
> > --
> > The default setting is disabled. They mention in the manual that if
> > enabled than SCSI ID are automatically assigned to those SCSI devices
> > that support SCAM. Those that don't usually are not affected (except
> > some olde
On Tue, 22 Jul 1997, David M wrote:
> Plug and Play SCAM support
> --
> The default setting is disabled. They mention in the manual that if
> enabled than SCSI ID are automatically assigned to those SCSI devices
> that support SCAM. Those that don't usually are not af
aptec's settings for the Ultra Wide SCSI
:Host Adapter I would like to know how I can fine tune it for Linux. Are
:there any documentation I can read regarding fine tuning this particular
:hardware for Linux? How about the latest drivers?
I used the aic7xxx drivers in the 2.0.30 kernel so
ost adapter supports the fast transfer rates (13.4,16,20.0)
of Ultra SCSI devices.
Should I enable this for Linux? Would the driver support it?
If you have experience with Adaptec's settings for the Ultra Wide SCSI
Host Adapter I would like to know how I can fine tune it for Linux.
With kernel-image 2.0.6, my aha152x controller was configured by a
kernel command line parameter, "aha152x=0x340,9,7,1" I upgraded to
kernel-image 2.0.25 and "modprobe aha152x aha152x=0x340,9,7,1",
which should do the exact same thing, tells me:
invalid module argument: aha152x=0x340,9,7,1
initiali
21 matches
Mail list logo
