From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 26 13:49:17 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA26673 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:49:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA26655 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:49:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA02357; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:29:38 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701262129.OAA02357@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: CMD640b ide controller bug workarounds? To: tom@sdf.com (Tom Samplonius) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:29:38 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, garman@phs.k12.ar.us, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: from "Tom Samplonius" at Jan 26, 97 04:34:04 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > See the test program on www.intel.com for the controller bug. > > I've been told by the user in question, that the ide check program from > Intel hangs on his system. Not too useful. There are two programs. I pointed at the wrong one. I posted an AltaVista search string that will find the other. > "Pure computer usage" will not be possible until a "pure computer" > exists. As it stands, sw people need to keep "adapting" to new hw bugs. Yes. And this is a case where they have not adapted, such that the user can't assume the sw platform is reliable on any hardware. I'm seperating the idea of a sw platform user from a sw user on that platform -- maybe that's the confusion? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.