Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 16:03:59 +0800 (WST) From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@obiwan.aceonline.com.au> To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> Cc: Hinrich Eilts <eilts@tor.muc.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Etherexpress 10/pro Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970414160130.1289A-100000@obiwan.aceonline.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970413234257.7719H-100000@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > If PnP of Etherexpress is disabled, it work, but the computer have to run > > W95 too, and this will fail with PnP disabled (the motherboard is a > > Gigabyte GA586ATM/P256, which has no support for non-PnP ISA cards leading > > to resource conflicts if the Etherexpress is in non-PnP mode). > > THen you have a bigger problem than FreeBSD can support :) Huh? That isn't true. :) You can specify Windows 95 to *use* a certain setting instead of letting Windows (/PnP) decide everything. I do this in my PC. I have non-PnP ISA Soundblaster Pro and 3com 3c509, and a PnP SB32. I just went into my BIOS, disabled the particular IRQs the non-PnP cards were set to, and *told* win95 to use certain settings for my PnP SB32 card. It complains saying it can no longer figure things out, but then, it doesn't do a crash hot job in the first place. (For a laugh, try autodetecting a non-PnP NE2000 clone and see how many times Win95 gets the IRQ right :) I think people trust PnP too much. Cya, Adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970414160130.1289A-100000>