Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:18:24 +0200 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay Message-ID: <183976925.20050329181824@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <6b3b25263c4e7776fd5127af2c536cd6@chrononomicon.com> References: <1173965660.20050328020543@wanadoo.fr> <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEEOOFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <1867854523.20050328120919@wanadoo.fr> <42480F8B.1060405@makeworld.com> <1407725672.20050328162134@wanadoo.fr> <6b3b25263c4e7776fd5127af2c536cd6@chrononomicon.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bart Silverstrim writes: > I think, correct me if I'm wrong Ted (et al), that he's saying the > microcode in the hardware was modified, thus has a bug proprietary to > the HP implementation of that controller, and the driver/interface in > NT either didn't get the error or was *ignoring* the error, whereas > FreeBSD, with a driver/interface based on the generic and marketed > version of the controller, was saying HELLO, SOMETHING ISN'T RIGHT > HERE!, and spewed it to the error logs. That is 100% guesswork. You have no idea why FreeBSD generated the error messages. If you do, then tell me _exactly_ what they mean. If it's just a matter of all-wise FreeBSD detecting a "bug" that dopey Windows NT missed, why were there never any problems with data loss or corruption under NT, and why did NT never stall as a result of problems with the disks ... and why didn't NT ever crash? FreeBSD not only spews out error messages that nobody understands or can explain, but it stalls, and sometimes it panics. > That makes it a hardware problem, unless you modify that driver to > ignore the error (like NT does) or get rid of the proprietary and/or > possibly failing controller in the first place. If it's an error you can ignored, it's not a hardware problem. If it's a failing controller, well, it's been "failing" for eight years now, and yet it still works. > Because they modify things so they're *almost* off the shelf, but > aren't, perhaps? A lot more than almost, I'm afraid. > Among other things they do to introduce "glitches"? What they introduce is mainly incompatibilities. You have to do everything their way, or not at all. > If you want to keep insisting on how superior it is, then reinstall it > and ignore the warnings. Why is this not an option to consider? Because I'd rather run FreeBSD, if I could just get it to work. -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?183976925.20050329181824>