From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 29 18:50:34 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9402616A4CE for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:50:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp9.wanadoo.fr (smtp9.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4457443D3F for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:50:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf0912.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id ECEA41C005B8 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:50:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pix.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-111-2-1-3.w81-50.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.50.80.3]) by mwinf0912.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id CBA641C005F3 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:50:32 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20050329185032834.CBA641C005F3@mwinf0912.wanadoo.fr Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 20:50:32 +0200 From: Anthony Atkielski X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <813611053.20050329205032@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <42498D19.60209@makeworld.com> References: <42480F8B.1060405@makeworld.com> <1648629793.20050329122346@wanadoo.fr> <42496060.1060404@makeworld.com> <467487023.20050329162852@wanadoo.fr> <42496992.7020800@makeworld.com> <1805326777.20050329181237@wanadoo.fr> <42498D19.60209@makeworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:50:34 -0000 Chris writes: > No - NOT the PC - the hardware that's in question. The Adaptec WITH the > modified code. I'm willing to bet, it's not. Should I check for restrictions on chipset temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure as well? > Again - I doubt that that perticulare Adaptec WITH the modifide code is > listed. Now I'll bet an untouched Adaptec is. Nothing on the list says either way. > The PC is NOT the issue. The modified Adaptec IS. FreeBSD is the target, not the controller. > No - not worthless - NOT SUPPORTED. Just like the HCL that MS puts out. There are lots of configurations unsupported by Microsoft that will still run Windows without problems. > Another thing to understand, most of the HP added code is related to > SNMP. That's what HP/Compaq does. Now, you also need to realize that the > drivers under NT talk to HAL (Hardware Abstration Layer) which happenes > to be far more forgiving of altered code then something under Unix where > the driver talks directly to the hardware. Are you saying that Windows NT has a superior design? -- Anthony