John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> probably said:
> May 18 12:55:17 merlin /kernel: arp: unknown hardware address format (0x0800)
> It's showed up 3 times in the past 36 or so hours, but not at any point in
> time that I can narrow it down to occurring near/after/during any specific
> system event.
>
>
On Fri, 19 May 2000, David Malone wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2000 at 12:32:02PM +0100, Mark Powell wrote:
> > I've noticed on all our 4.0S machines, cvsupped as recently as last week,
> > that "fsck -y" cleans the fs, but the kernel still refuses to mount it
> > claiming it is not clean. Hitting res
On Fri, May 19, 2000 at 12:32:02PM +0100, Mark Powell wrote:
> I've noticed on all our 4.0S machines, cvsupped as recently as last week,
> that "fsck -y" cleans the fs, but the kernel still refuses to mount it
> claiming it is not clean. Hitting reset and letting the machine come back
> gets the
I am working with someone else on a temporary hack or workaround that will
allow ECP parallel port users to use their ZIP drives. I can't take any of
the credit for it, but i am helping post the fix.
It appears that either ECP mode is not properly reported to the imm driver,
or ECP mode is not
Hi all,
Since upgrading to 4.0-Stable, I've been getting a sporadic error message
in /var/log/messages that shows up as follows:
May 18 12:55:17 merlin /kernel: arp: unknown hardware address format (0x0800)
It's showed up 3 times in the past 36 or so hours, but not at any point in
time tha
I've noticed on all our 4.0S machines, cvsupped as recently as last week,
that "fsck -y" cleans the fs, but the kernel still refuses to mount it
claiming it is not clean. Hitting reset and letting the machine come back
gets the kernel to accept that it is indeed clean. This is Any ideas?
Cheers.
Hi
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
> On 18-May-00 Robert Bowen wrote:
> > Not only does Linux have support for it, but so do NetBSD AND OpenBSD. I
> > never thought I'd see the day when FreeBSD had less x86 hardware support
> > than OpenBSD! I asked about porting it over, but no-o
