From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 29 08:20:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id IAA29148 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:20:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from psiint.com (vv.psiint.com [204.189.53.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA29114 Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:20:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by psiint.com (8.6.12/4.03) id IAA57972; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:20:09 -0800 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:20:07 -0800 (PST) From: Dave Walton To: Michael Smith cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, lmcsato@lmc.ericsson.se, brian@MediaCity.Com, questions@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BitsurfrPro on FBSD 2.1 & MLPPP broken In-Reply-To: <199603290153.MAA19252@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Michael Smith wrote: > Dave Walton stands accused of saying: > > > > I don't mean to be a pain here, but I really don't understand the > > insistence that this is purely a hardware problem. The second half of > > No matter what the input, the BS shouldn't crash and reboot. Period. > This is why it's a hardware problem. That's a good point. However, I think the BitSURFR has some sort of software reset capability. If the software is sending something it shouldn't, there exists the possibility that it's triggering that. > > his sentence above (which you didn't quote) points out that the same > > hardware works correctly under Win95. I'm not suggesting that it's > > So the hardware works 'properly' if it works under W95? That's just the > sort of pathetic mentality that makes 90% of the PC hardware on the market > just so much rubbish. Whoa. Relax, Mike. I was just saying that it works without crashing under . That the software it works with is Win95 is incidental, and doesn't change my point. Changing software makes the problem go away, so maybe there's something that can be done to the problem software that will make it work. However, Jordan commented that FreeBSD pushes the BitSURFR harder than Win95. That's probably true, which means the BitSURFR is failing under high load. In other words, it's broken. I think I'll sit down and shut up now. Dave ========================================================================== David Walton Unix Programmer PSI INTERNATIONAL, Inc. email: dwalton@psiint.com 190 South Orchard #C200 Fax :(707)451-6484 Vacaville, CA 95688 Phone:(707)451-3503 ==========================================================================