From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue May 6 15:26:05 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA09278 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 6 May 1997 15:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cdsnet.net (mail.cdsnet.net [204.118.244.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA09269 for ; Tue, 6 May 1997 15:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cdsnet.net (mail.cdsnet.net [204.118.244.5]) by mail.cdsnet.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA24364; Tue, 6 May 1997 15:25:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 15:25:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Jaye Mathisen To: Tom Samplonius cc: dennis , Tim Tsai , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: if_de.c ???? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Fine. Whoever Peter is, send me an address and a DE500-AA 21140-AC PCI card will be in Fedex within the hour. On Tue, 6 May 1997, Tom Samplonius wrote: > > On Tue, 6 May 1997, Jaye Mathisen wrote: > > > While I rarely agree with dennis, he's dead on with this one. I bought > > 30-40 de cards for my 25 or so servers, now only to find it apparently a > > dead-end driver, and the Intel card being the card-de-jour (or however > > that's spelled). > > The driver is not "dead-end". It just hasn't been updated for a while. > It just has problems with the new 10/100 cards. In fact there are patches > floating about for all of this stuff, but no one has done the integration > work yet. In fact, Peter has worked on the de driver, and the > ifconfig changes that are required, but has no de card to test on. > Volunteers? > > > And so I'll start purchasing intel cards, and 8 months from now, the > > Novell NE2000 cards will be the hot card to have. > > > > I fell prey to this once with Adaptec cards and FreeBSD. I'm at my > > patience limit with FreeBSD sometimes. > > The adaptec cards work great. Some of the ahc driver revs have been > bad, but lately very good. I've got a 2940 based moderately loaded server > with 189 days of uptime! > > > It's like FreeBSD is always at this "80%" useful stage. It always seems > > to be burning up 10 hours of time a week just kind of keeping the whole OS > > all together. Every upgrade seems to break something that worked fine > > before. Significant features don't seem to work when really stressed. > > I don't see this at all, but perhaps I deploy FreeBSD a bit differently. > I have a devel machine that cvsup things to, then do a build, make sure > things work ok, then NFS mount /usr/src and /usr/obj elsewhere to upgrade > all other systems. I monitor the cvs commit lists to make sure I'm > getting bits at the right time. I've been doing this with the 2.1-stable > tree for a long time, and have yet to be burnt. > > It seems that a lot of people moved applications over to 2.2.x systems, > that would have been better off with 2.1.7.1. 2.2.x is currently at the > stage where it works well for some applications and systems and poorly for > others. 2.1.7.1 may no longer be "cool" with all the 3.0 snaps floating > about, but it gets the job done. > > > > > Jaye "Occasionally wants to throw the whole kit and kaboodle through the > > wall, but is generally pretty happy with things" Mathisen. > > > > > > > > Tom >