From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 27 15:43:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47DF416A4CE for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 15:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carver.gumbysoft.com (carver.gumbysoft.com [66.220.23.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A7343D1D for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 15:43:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwhite@gumbysoft.com) Received: by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2457B72DCB; Thu, 27 May 2004 15:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by carver.gumbysoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F65B72DB5; Thu, 27 May 2004 15:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 15:42:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White To: Vasenin Alexander aka BlackSir In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040527154113.E53810@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 4.9 (4.10) on Fujitsu-Siemens Primergy RX100? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 22:43:30 -0000 On Tue, 25 May 2004, Vasenin Alexander aka BlackSir wrote: > I'm planning to use subj 19" 1U server in production system, but FSC don't officially support FreeBSD on any of they servers. In > technical data I found some piece of infos about this system. Some parts of system are not in the > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.9R/hardware-i386.html , but very close to them. FreeBSD should run fine on this. There's Tyan boards that are very similar that work fine. > RAID: Promise 20270 Only 20265,20269 and some FastTrack? Promise dev IDs iterate pretty rapidly, but Soren also keeps the Promise support fresh. > LAN: Intel 82540EM(1Gbit) Supported > LAN: Intel 82550PM(100Mbit) Seems like not supported, but intel.com tells opposite? No problems on either of these (em and fxp, respectively) A report from an actual user would be good, but from the description I don't see anything that would be a problem. -- Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve dwhite@gumbysoft.com | www.FreeBSD.org