Re: 2.2 and tulip.c

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
30 Dec 1998 17:39:00 -0800

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Joerg Schuler: "Re: 2.2.0pre1 ac1 over ac2"
Previous message: Sid Boyce: "re: 2.2pre1 crashes with partition check"
Maybe in reply to: David: "2.2 and tulip.c"

In article <linux.kernel.199812292020.MAA01832@midnight.hacking.in.the.land.of.kalifornia.com>,
David <david@kalifornia.com> wrote:
>iso-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Reply to mail from Peter T. Breuer about 2.2 and tulip.c
>-----------------
>> Why? Is it any better? Why don't you just comment the #error line? It's
>> clearly only triggered by the 220 numbering on the new kernel.
>
>yes, it is better because v.90 actually works with my newer tulip cards.

It doesn't work so well with some older cards (like the SMC
EtherPower 100's I've got in one of my lease machines -- with v.90,
the network will come up, the transmitters will go *aaack*, and the
network will freeze. Not good behavior in a kitchen appliance.)

____
david parsons \bi/ And this after including it in the Mastodon-2.0.28 patch.
\/ Sigh.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Joerg Schuler: "Re: 2.2.0pre1 ac1 over ac2"
Previous message: Sid Boyce: "re: 2.2pre1 crashes with partition check"
Maybe in reply to: David: "2.2 and tulip.c"