Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 23:13:59 -0500 From: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> To: "Lars Eggert" <larse@ISI.EDU>, "Norbert Koch" <nk@LF.net> Cc: <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ISO image available? Message-ID: <00e701c0c3d0$2a8ef640$931576d8@inethouston.net> References: <3AD5D38F.E05083DB@isi.edu> <20010412121514.532abb29.ahze@ahze.net> <20010412112212.A22614@dan.emsphone.com> <3AD5E43C.596F1AFE@isi.edu> <vzbsq2qafa.fsf@lamia.LF.net> <3AD5FE83.7D96EB19@isi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
the only difference I know of between the 905b and c is wake on lan. I thought I heard something about a 905c II that had problems with freebsd, but I don't remember much more. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lars Eggert" <larse@ISI.EDU> To: "Norbert Koch" <nk@LF.net> Cc: <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 2:14 PM Subject: Re: ISO image available? > Norbert Koch wrote: > > > The 5.0-20010410-CURRENT installer doesn't recognize my "3Com 3c905C-TX > > > Fast Etherlink XL", which in 4.2 is handled by the xl driver. I guess the > > > netinstall will have to wait... > > > > Uh, is there so much difference between 3c905(B|C)-TX? I ask, because > > I have > > > > xl0: <3Com 3c905B-TX Fast Etherlink XL> port 0xd000-0xd07f > > mem 0xdd000000-0xdd00007f irq 11 at device 12.0 on pci0 > > I don't know. :-) > All I can say is that it is recognized fine under 4.2. > -- > Lars Eggert <larse@isi.edu> Information Sciences Institute > http://www.isi.edu/larse/ University of Southern California To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00e701c0c3d0$2a8ef640$931576d8>