Date: Tue, 05 Nov 1996 03:43:43 +0100 From: sthaug@nethelp.no To: richardc@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU Cc: se@zpr.uni-koeln.de, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ncrcontrol in -current Message-ID: <2731.847161823@verdi.nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 4 Nov 1996 16:18:37 -0800 (PST)" References: <Pine.PTX.3.95.961104161459.2357A-100000@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The reason for a mismatch (if both ncrcontrol and the kernel > > were in fact built from corresponding sources) is that you > > specified some kernel config option (i.e. the maximum number > > of LUNs or TAGs) that have not become visible to the build > > process for ncrcontrol. > > Hmmm, okay... > > > So, please add those kernel options to the ncrcontrol Makefile > > and rebuilt ncrcontrol, if that might be the cause of your > > problem. > > Oh okay but I know I don't have any kernel options relating to the > ncr since the other machines use Adaptec 2940W controllers and not the > NCR-810. Do you have FAILSAFE? That one bit me. It *does* influence max # of LUNs/tags. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2731.847161823>