Date: Sat, 28 Oct 1995 13:26:54 -0701 (PDT) From: Mike A Lyons <lyonsm@netbistro.com> To: "Eric S. Hvozda" <hvozda@netcom.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mcd0 vs. ix0 [was: ix0 ok for Intel EtherExpres PRO?] Message-ID: <Pine.BSD.3.91.951028131524.21979E-100000@vortex.netbistro.com> In-Reply-To: <199510231543.IAA13400@netcom6.netcom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 23 Oct 1995, Eric S. Hvozda wrote: > Just got a Gateway 2000 P5-133 here. IS set it up, so I have no > hardware docs at all :-( It has an ethernet card it in and the DOS > driver reports it as a 'EtherExpress PRO' at 0x300. It looks like ix0 > should do the trick, but it fails to find the card (I got everything > else to work, even the ATAPI cdrom *shiver*). > Anyone had experience with this beastie? Hints? Funny you should mention this. :-) This is a battle I am somewhat familiar with. (FreeBSD 2.0.5). I've got a box I've thrown together here to be a small POP mail server. (About two dozen users, UUCP feed for email). About 80% of the time, from cold start, the EtherExpress (at 0x300, irq 10, all "fancy" features disabled) is incorrectly probed as a Mitsumi CD-ROM controller. It seems more likely to probe correctly upon warm start, for some reason, but the Mitsumi driver still incorrectly claims the network interface an annoying large percentage of the time. The obvious solution is to build a kernel without the Mitsumi driver, and I'll do it eventually; but this is the only FreeBSD box I have around at the moment (rest are BSDi), and it's got a whopping 4MB of RAM and a 200MB HD. :-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSD.3.91.951028131524.21979E-100000>