Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 18:12:49 +1000 From: Jonathan Michaels <jon@welearn.com.au> To: David Gilbert <dgilbert@velocet.ca> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: curious about memory report usingfreebsd v3.3-release Message-ID: <20000515181246.A48481@phoenix.welearn.com.au> In-Reply-To: <14622.50374.168438.456842@trooper.velocet.net>; from David Gilbert on Sun, May 14, 2000 at 11:22:46AM -0400 References: <14622.50374.168438.456842@trooper.velocet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 11:22:46AM -0400, David Gilbert wrote: > I had quite a few problems with that SMC "tx" network card under 3.2 > and 3.3. We eventually ditched them. We found that we had to 'ouch', i have a smc 9432tx in this machine as well. > ifconfig down then ifconfig up them every so often, or their > performance would decrease rapidly. mine just ground to a halt that that was it .. no more go no more do anything. but, whern taken back to supplier it worked a treat in teh ms win nt v3.51 server and several ms win nt v4 workstations .. it was one of my more pedantic days and i want "proof" it worked and not just one isolated case. > This may be fixed in 3.4-STABLE, but I have not checked. as, one poster said "v3.x is nearly dead", after some thought i might just as well skip v3.x and go straight to v4 .. thought thier might be some issues thier as well. ummmm, desisions. > Really, I'm only trusting rl and fxp drivers right now. It's not that is what i thought and so i purchased a intel eepro .. only to find i got one of teh "new microsoftised ones" with the ake on lan cable and all that other paraphenalia. thier was some mention of a 'problem' in teh firmware that make it hard to have two of these cards on teh same segment. if its of any value the chipset identifies itself as gd82559. > scientific, but I have experiences that the de, dc, tx, ep and xl > drivers can be broken under at least my circumstances. The dc and de > drivers are particularly strange. i've got a couple of old smc etherelite .. the old kind with jumpers and not much smarts, sounds like these are the best kind to use, well untill the manufactures get thier silicon sorted out. or the drivers writers can sort out the strangeses that hide beneath the clear and glistening surface of teh gallium arsenide coating. with thakns to all of wrote .. still no wiser but got some interesting ideas about how modern day bioses work or not as the case may be. on the same track, i just made a set of v4-release bootstrap diskettes and discovered this same (strange to me) behaviour on my much older and untill today alsway (freebsd and bios) reporting 640k/64mb .. now it reports as 639k/64mb, from memory freebsd v2.2.5-release which this machine has run for some 4 years now, reports 640kb/64mb. on a slightly different note, qnx v4.24 also reports 640kb/64mb. to reiterate, this is just a curiousity, but one i would like an explanation for .. if one can be had that is. warm regards jonathan -- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000515181246.A48481>