Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:32:09 -0500 (EST) From: Peter <petermatulis@yahoo.ca> To: Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com>, Chris <chrcoluk@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Disappointed with version 6.0 Message-ID: <20060315153209.2191.qmail@web60017.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <44181EBD.9050404@dial.pipex.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> wrote: > Chris wrote: > > >[K8V-X SE] > >Sounds harsh, a low end board may have performance problems and less > >capability but it shouldnt justify an operating system not working, > or > >are only high end boards supported? > > > > > I have this board, and it works for what I do with it (single SATA > 200Gb > disk + built-in ethernet - under 5.4 i386). > > Having said that, this board is a low-end piece of crud and I > wouldn't > recommend it to anyone. I intended to get the non-X version (because > it > was cheap with Gigabit ether, but got bilked by the supplier and > didn't > realise until I'd built the damn thing). I've never used USB, or > stuck > multiple disks in it, so I have no idea if I would have the same > problems as you; sorry. > > If you want a better board without going all expensive-server, then > my > ASUS A8V deluxe (socket 939) has worked fine, though I've only used > USB > under windows. > > Should cheap boards work? Yes they should, and by and large they do. > > But a specific model of cheap board can easily have specific problems > > and there is no way for a project like FreeBSD to test every board on > > the market - they change too fast and there are just too many of 'em. > > FWIW, there are cheap boards which run really crap under Windows, as > well. > > My motherboard is > > >the ASUS K8V-X SE that I chose because it was listed as compatible > at > > >the FreeBSD/amd64 Project: > > > > > >http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64/motherboards.html > > Are you running the amd64 version of FreeBSD? If so, try the i386 > version and see if that solves your problems. You also have to take > such compatibility information with a small pinch of salt. > Undoubtedly someone has reported that this motherboard booted amd64 > version of FreeBSD just fine, but they might not have pushed every > aspect of the board. > > I haven't followed this thread that closely, but IIUC, in your shoes > I would try the system with *just* the problem disk as a master (and > the CD) and see if you can do anything with it. (I think Ted > suggested that already). Also, since you seem to have gone for PATA > - check your cable or try a different one - probably won't help but > you have to try. > > If you are getting to the point where the disk is recognised by > FreeBSD then see what sysutils/smartmontools says about it. Just in > case. Right now I am running the 40 GB and the 200 GB IDE drives as master and slave on the primary controller and the CDROM as master on the secondary. The USB and serial ports are working. I concluded that the 300 GB disk was bad so I am returning it. Currently I can say the only problem I am experiencing is that the system will not come back up after a (simulated) power failure (I'm using a UPS) even though I tell it to do so in the BIOS. Another point is that while in the BIOS the CPU temperature shows around 45 C which does not seem possible. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060315153209.2191.qmail>