[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RE: fedora-test-list Digest, Vol 3, Issue 121




Here are some new torrent files.

from kuix.de :

http://kuix.de/fedora/fedora-core-2-isos.torrent
http://kuix.de/fedora/fedora-core-2-DVD.torrent

LEASE BE A NICE PERSON and do not quit your downloader after you have
finished downloading, at least for a while.

Actually for best use of torrent join an existing one rather than setting
up your own. Big torrents surely work much better than several little
ones.

Michael Young


I'm not setting up my own. BitTorrents were released on slashdot.org yesterday, and the tracker blew up sometime around 20:00 EST.
These are replacements for those BitTorrents.





"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana." - Marx, Groucho





From: fedora-test-list-request redhat com
Reply-To: fedora-test-list redhat com
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Subject: fedora-test-list Digest, Vol 3, Issue 121
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 15:29:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from hormel.redhat.com ([209.132.177.30]) by mc6-f40.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 17 May 2004 12:29:42 -0700
Received: from listman.util.phx.redhat.com (listman.util.phx.redhat.com [10.8.4.110])by hormel.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPid D9ACE737FD; Mon, 17 May 2004 15:29:30 -0400 (EDT)
X-Message-Info: QIy1oIULmHeZ0Z8YVLJR2qGyAfVDCUeR
X-BeenThere: fedora-test-list redhat com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: junk
List-Id: For testers of Fedora Core development releases<fedora-test-list.redhat.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list>,<mailto:fedora-test-list-request redhat com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </archives/fedora-test-list>
List-Post: <mailto:fedora-test-list redhat com>
List-Help: <mailto:fedora-test-list-request redhat com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list>,<mailto:fedora-test-list-request redhat com?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: fedora-test-list-bounces redhat com
Message-Id: <20040517192930 D9ACE737FD hormel redhat com>
Return-Path: fedora-test-list-bounces redhat com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 May 2004 19:29:43.0897 (UTC) FILETIME=[4E668C90:01C43C45]


Send fedora-test-list mailing list submissions to
	fedora-test-list redhat com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	fedora-test-list-request redhat com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	fedora-test-list-owner redhat com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of fedora-test-list digest..."


Today's Topics:


   1. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (Nico Kadel-Garcia)
   2. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (Mark Lane)
   3. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (Alan Cox)
   4. Re: How to help? was Re: Serious reservations about FC2
      release on	5/18 (JR Boyens)
   5. Re: Token Ring driver not compiled in FC2 (Alan Cox)
   6. Re: interpret this BIOS (Alan Cox)
   7. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (Mark Lane)
   8. Re: How to help? was Re: Serious reservations about FC2
      release on 	5/18 (Steve Fink)
   9. Re: interpret this BIOS  (reg dwf com)
  10. Re: interpret this BIOS  (Mike Hogsett)
  11. Re: interpret this BIOS (Alan Cox)
  12. Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
      (Michael Stenner)
  13. Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
      (Michael Stenner)
  14. Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
      (James W. Bennett)
  15. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (James Ralston)
  16. Re: Gigabit ethernet cards (William Lovaton)
  17. VMware and Fedora Core 2 (Thorsten)


----------------------------------------------------------------------


Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:20:20 -0400
From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia" <nkadel merl com>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: "For testers of Fedora Core development releases"
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <018c01c43c33$3b3c4220$b28ccb89 zeppo>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="utf-8"


----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Lane" <mark harddata com> To: "For testers of Fedora Core development releases" <fedora-test-list redhat com> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 1:08 PM Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards


> On May 17, 2004 11:11 am, William Lovaton
<williama_lovaton coomeva com co>
> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm going to use FC2 Final in my production server and I want to upgrade
> > the network card to a Gigabit ethernet. What model is known to work
> > well in FC2??
> >
> SysKonnect 9xxx, 3com 940, Broadcom, Intel


"Broadcom" and "Intel" are not models, they are company names. Be specific,
please.




------------------------------


Message: 2
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:18:12 -0600
From: Mark Lane <mark harddata com>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <200405171118 12541 mark harddata com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"

On May 17, 2004 11:20 am, "Nico Kadel-Garcia" <nkadel merl com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Lane" <mark harddata com>
> To: "For testers of Fedora Core development releases"
> <fedora-test-list redhat com>
> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 1:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
>
> > On May 17, 2004 11:11 am, William Lovaton
>
> <williama_lovaton coomeva com co>
>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > I'm going to use FC2 Final in my production server and I want to
> > > upgrade the network card to a Gigabit ethernet. What model is known to
> > > work well in FC2??
> >
> > SysKonnect 9xxx, 3com 940, Broadcom, Intel
>
> "Broadcom" and "Intel" are not models, they are company names. Be specific,
> please.


Pretty much any Broadcom or Intel GigE Nic. You can research the model numbers
yourself. I don't have the time.
--
Mark Lane, CET mailto:mark harddata com
Hard Data Ltd. http://www.harddata.com
T: 01-780-456-9771 F: 01-780-456-9772
11060 - 166 Avenue Edmonton, AB, Canada, T5X 1Y3
--> Ask me about our Excellent 1U Systems! <--





------------------------------


Message: 3
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:38:23 -0400
From: Alan Cox <alan redhat com>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <20040517173823 GM15849 devserv devel redhat com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:11:23PM -0500, William Lovaton wrote:
> the network card to a Gigabit ethernet.  What model is known to work
> well in FC2??

Im using realtek 8169 - not the flashiest or fastest but works rather
nicely and is incredibly cheap




------------------------------


Message: 4
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:46:05 -0500
From: JR Boyens <jboyens fooninja org>
Subject: Re: How to help? was Re: Serious reservations about FC2
	release on	5/18
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <1084815964 15870 1 camel surly fooninja org>
Content-Type: text/plain

On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 13:59 -0400, Anthony DeStefano wrote:
> >> Has no one simply tried this?
> >>
> >> For Windows XP, boot from the install CD and enter the Recovery
> >> Console.
> >> Then issue the command:
> >> Code:
> >> bootcfg /rebuild
> >>
> >>
> >> This fixes the bootloader for windows xp. But I do not know if it will
> >> work in this situation.
> >> I cannot test this as I do not have this problem.
> >>
> >>
> >> Law
> >
> > Let me know if it works or not. I hope it helps.
> >
>
> This does not work. Something (fdisk or grub) is overwriting information
> that it shouldn't be. I've looked at it a bit and you can see it in the
> Partition Magic attachment in the bug report. What's happening is after
> these changes are made on the primary disk (hda), the BIOS is thinking
> that it should be using CHS mode instead of LBA. Things point more
> towards grub then fdisk; since in my experience it happens even when I
> don't repartition.
>
> Here's my system:
>
> Asus A7N8X Deluxe using onboard IDE controller
> 80GB WD drive (hda)
> 17GB Maxtor drive (hdc)
>
> Some people reported it only happens with large disks (> 120GB), but
> that's not the case here.
>
> That's as far as I've gotten. I do want to help all I can, but haven't
> had anytime to dig deep.


I could swear that the cause of this problem was the use of parted in
the install partitioning process... Has this been since declared wrong?

--
JR Boyens
jboyens fooninja org




------------------------------


Message: 5
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:47:05 -0400
From: Alan Cox <alan redhat com>
Subject: Re: Token Ring driver not compiled in FC2
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <20040517174705 GB22919 devserv devel redhat com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 01:16:14PM -0400, Jeremy Savoy wrote:
> I would like to compile the drivers as modules and just use them with
> the current FC2 kernel - in the past I've always had symbol trouble
> trying to do this - anyone out there have any pointers?

If token ring is disabled entirely then you will inevitably get different
symbols so may need to roll a new kernel anyway. Knowing if token ring
builds and works on FC2 would be useful for errata stuff. Right now it seems
the only large token ring network on the planet (and the one that breaks
stuff reliabily and rapidly) belongs to a large blue company.


Alan




------------------------------


Message: 6
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:54:14 -0400
From: Alan Cox <alan redhat com>
Subject: Re: interpret this BIOS
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <20040517175414 GB1667 devserv devel redhat com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 11:51:16AM -0600, reg dwf com wrote:
> BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
>  BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009e800 (usable)

Most of 640K RAM
>  BIOS-e820: 000000000009e800 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)

A bit reserved (EBDA)

> BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)

ROMs

>  BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000002fffc000 (usable)
Lots of memory

>  BIOS-e820: 000000002fffc000 - 000000002ffff000 (ACPI data)
>  BIOS-e820: 000000002ffff000 - 0000000030000000 (ACPI NVS)

Two chunks used by ACPI

> BIOS-e820: 00000000ffff0000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)

Ending a 4Gb




------------------------------


Message: 7
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:48:46 -0600
From: Mark Lane <mark harddata com>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <200405171148 46688 mark harddata com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"

On May 17, 2004 11:38 am, Alan Cox <alan redhat com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:11:23PM -0500, William Lovaton wrote:
> > the network card to a Gigabit ethernet.  What model is known to work
> > well in FC2??
>
> Im using realtek 8169 - not the flashiest or fastest but works rather
> nicely and is incredibly cheap

Alan, it must like you. I have an onboard 8169 that worked fine when it
worked. The device would disappear on every other boot.

--
Mark Lane, CET mailto:mark harddata com
Hard Data Ltd. http://www.harddata.com
T: 01-780-456-9771   F: 01-780-456-9772
11060 - 166 Avenue Edmonton, AB, Canada, T5X 1Y3
--> Ask me about our Excellent 1U Systems! <--




------------------------------


Message: 8
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:19:29 -0600
From: "Steve Fink" <stevef netvantix com>
Subject: Re: How to help? was Re: Serious reservations about FC2
	release on 	5/18
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200405171219 AA19290116 netvantix com>

I'm sorry if this has been covered before but I haven't been following any
of the threads discussing this problem with XP.

Could someone with this problem try these steps to fix the issue?

---------------------------------------------

Preparation:

Please get the following items before beginning:

1. Fedora Core 2 boot disk - if you don't know how to make one refer to
Appendix A
2. MS Boot disk including fdisk - if you don't know how to make one refer
to Appendix B
3. Knoppix CD - If you don't have one get one at http://www.knoppix.org
4. Bucket load of patience - If you don't have one get one.


Execution:


1. Boot into Fedora and verify your /boot/grub/menu.lst exists and should
look like this:

# grub.conf generated by anaconda
#
# Note that you do not have to rerun grub after making changes to this file
# NOTICE:  You have a /boot partition.  This means that
#          all kernel and initrd paths are relative to /boot/, eg.
#          root (hd0,2)
#          kernel /vmlinuz-version ro root=/dev/hda5
#          initrd /initrd-version.img
#boot=/dev/hda
default=1
timeout=10
splashimage=(hd0,2)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
title Fedora Core (2.6.5-1.327)
	root (hd0,2)
	kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.5-1.327 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb selinux=0 quiet
	initrd /initrd-2.6.5-1.327.img
title WinXP
	rootnoverify (hd0,1)
	chainloader +1

***NOTE***
This menu.lst assumes that XP is on the 1st partition and Fedora /boot is
on the second.

2. Reboot using MS Boot disk
3. Run fdisk /mbr - This will restore the MS bootloader to the Master Boot
Record
4. Reboot into XP and make sure it works
5. Reboot using the Knoppix CD
6. Open a shell
7. su
8. root knoppix:/# grub
Probing devices to guess BIOS drives. This may take a long time.

GNU GRUB version 0.94 (640K lower / 3072K upper memory)
[ Minimal BASH-like line editing is supported. For the first word, TAB
lists possible command completions. Anywhere else TAB lists the possible
completions of a device/filename. ]

grub>

Now run these three commands:

grub> root (hd0,0)
grub> setup (hd0)
grub> quit

9. Reboot, and you will be greeted by the GRUB command shell. Note that
the root value is variable, depending on where GRUB is installed on your
system. setup (hd0) installs GRUB to the MBR (master boot record), and
quit exits GRUB

If your /boot/grub/menu.lst is setup properly this should give you a
working GRUB configuration.

---------------

Best of Luck,

Steve


---------------





Appendix A:


Making a Linux boot disk

Most folks ignore that operating system installation procedure where it is
asked if a boot disk (emergency disk) should be made.

While this boot disk is important in Windows operating systems, it is even
more important in Linux, especially in a dual-boot system, where Windows
and Linux exist together. Even if you boot using a bootloader existing on
a system hard-drive, you should keep an up to date boot disk handy. If the
standard boot process goes awry, toss the boot disk in, reboot, and then
you can get in to repair the problem.

So during an installation/upgrade of an OS, when asked to make a boot
disk....Definitely do so!

But, what happens if you didn't make a boot disk during the Linux install?
Don't fear, mkbootdisk is there for you...

Typical command line....

/sbin/mkbootdisk --device /dev/fd0 2.6.5-1.327

This command instructs the mkbootdisk executable to use the floppy disk
drive (/dev/fd0) to write the boot disk info to, and to send it all the
appropriate information to load the kernel numbered 2.6.5-1.327

A man page of mkbootdisk provides more on the command, but here are a few
quickies:

-mkbootdisk might reside in different places on different distros
-if --device is not specified, it will by default use /dev/fd0....so you
can shorten the length of the command line entry by not using it if your
floppy exists at that default location.
-remember that if you have multiple kernels installed, one boot disk may
not properly boot the other kernels, so you would be best off making one
for each kernel.



Appendix B:

Making a MS boot disk


Double Click on My Computer Insert Floppy diskette into Floppy Drive Right Click on Floppy Drive choose Format Click on Checkbox next to Add System Files Allow disk to format and copy system files Search for fdisk and copy it to the floppy




------------------------------


Message: 9
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:22:01 -0600
From: reg dwf com
Subject: Re: interpret this BIOS
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>, alan redhat com
Message-ID: <200405171822 i4HIM1PW016865 orion dwf com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

> On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 11:51:16AM -0600, reg dwf com wrote:

> > BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
> >  BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009e800 (usable)
>
> Most of 640K RAM
> >  BIOS-e820: 000000000009e800 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
>
> A bit reserved (EBDA)
>
> >  BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
>
> ROMs
>
> >  BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000002fffc000 (usable)
> Lots of memory
>
> >  BIOS-e820: 000000002fffc000 - 000000002ffff000 (ACPI data)
> >  BIOS-e820: 000000002ffff000 - 0000000030000000 (ACPI NVS)
>
> Two chunks used by ACPI
>
> >  BIOS-e820: 00000000ffff0000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
>
> Ending a 4Gb
>
>
> --

Perhaps you can be a bit more specific.
The system in fact has a 512MB chip and a 256MB chip for a total of 768/775Mb


You seem to show that this is shown in BIOS as a single entry, rather
than an entry for each stick, is that true?

And of course, I dont understand how to interpret the numbers that I see.
My first guess would be that they are starting point, size (is there any
documentation?,- I didnt find it)

But if I believe that, then 0x2fffc000 = 805289984 which is wrong for the size.

So, back to my initial question: How do I interpret this stuff?

--
                                        Reg.Clemens
                                        reg dwf com





------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 11:34:34 -0700
From: Mike Hogsett <hogsett csl sri com>
Subject: Re: interpret this BIOS
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <200405171834 i4HIYY9A004063 beast csl sri com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


> Perhaps you can be a bit more specific.
> The system in fact has a 512MB chip and a 256MB chip for a total of 768/775Mb


> ...

> But if I believe that, then 0x2fffc000 = 805289984 which is wrong for the siz
> e.


805,289,984 is 16Kbytes less than 768Mbytes.

- Mike








------------------------------


Message: 11
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 14:38:29 -0400
From: Alan Cox <alan redhat com>
Subject: Re: interpret this BIOS
To: reg dwf com
Cc: alan redhat com, For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <20040517183829 GA17773 devserv devel redhat com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:22:01PM -0600, reg dwf com wrote:
> Perhaps you can be a bit more specific.
> The system in fact has a 512MB chip and a 256MB chip for a total of 768/775Mb
> You seem to show that this is shown in BIOS as a single entry, rather
> than an entry for each stick, is that true?


Yes. The memory is described in terms of start/end address of each block
not of each chip

> But if I believe that, then 0x2fffc000 = 805289984 which is wrong for the size.

That looks about right. Remember its in 1024's and that comes out at
just under 768Mb. A small amount has ben borrowed by the bios

> So, back to my initial question: How do I interpret this stuff?

[Start] [End] [Usage]





------------------------------

Message: 12
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:41:19 -0700
From: Michael Stenner <mstenner ece arizona edu>
Subject: Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <20040517194118 GH15541 ece arizona edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 10:25:00PM -0400, Sean Estabrooks wrote:
> Nobody seems to think it makes Windows XP look bad.  I'm sure they'll
> be just as understanding about FC2.   Funny how people expect more
> from something they don't pay a dime for.   Anyway, i'm sure it will all
> work soon enough.

A number of people have made comments to this effect, and that the
windows install will hose your linux partition, too.  There is an
important difference:

  The windows installer offers to hose your linux partition and then
  does so when you click OK.  It sounds like the current FC2 installer
  offers to set things up so they both work, and then proceeds to hose
  your windows partition.  That's not cool at all.

Properly informing the user about what's going to happen makes a big
difference.

					-Michael
--
  Michael D. Stenner                            mstenner ece arizona edu
  ECE Department, the University of Arizona                 520-626-1619
  1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104                 ECE 524G




------------------------------


Message: 13
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:44:18 -0700
From: Michael Stenner <mstenner ece arizona edu>
Subject: Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <20040517194417 GI15541 ece arizona edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 12:10:19AM -0400, Sean Estabrooks wrote:
> Go complain to Microsoft who charged you money for the privilege of
> not supporting dual boot with Linux.

But they do not CLAIM to support it.  This would be a different issue
if FC2 clearly said that your windows partition would be un-bootable.
Instead, it offers to set it up for you.

					-Michael
--
  Michael D. Stenner                            mstenner ece arizona edu
  ECE Department, the University of Arizona                 520-626-1619
  1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104                 ECE 524G




------------------------------


Message: 14
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 14:11:29 -0500
From: "James W. Bennett" <silverhead comcast net>
Subject: Re: Serious reservations about FC2 release on 5/18
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <1084821089 1976 8 camel localhost localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain

On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 10:20, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2004 05:46:16 -0400, Phil Savoie <psavoie1783 rogers com> wrote:
> > Sure Sean. This is a product. This is no different than a car company
> > promoting a new state of the art car. Everything works except they
> > don't tell you that the brakes that used to work in reverse last year
> > don't this year. But according to you, if you need to back up, you are
> > a loser.
>
> You need to be very careful about analogies to cars. Fedora is not a
> product, its important to be clear about that, its a project.
>
> And lets also be clear about this issue and issue like it in general.
> A lot of bugs are difficult for developers to reproduce locally on
> their hardware. A lot of bugs can arise because of complicated
> interactions between hardware and software. Whatever is happening with
> fedora in this case might be a kernel 2.6 issue, it might be a
> partitioning tool issue, it might be a grub issue, it might be a bios
> issue, it might be a combination of all those or none. Whatever it
> is, I'm very much NOT convinced this is as wide spread as people would
> believe. I have heard fc2t3 install dual boot scenarios that have
> worked without a hitch. Hell even one bug reporter in the comments
> tried to reproduce the problem after a bios upgrade and could
> not...that suggests something.
>
>
> -jef
--




I for one have had FC2T3 installed on my main machine since it came out
and I can't believe how solid it is. I have no problems with dual boot.
I dual boot windows 2000 and have hadn't a single problem even though I
seldom ever use windows. The Fedora software developers have done a
magnificent job.

James W. Bennett <silverhead comcast net>




------------------------------


Message: 15
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 15:10:50 -0400
From: James Ralston <qralston+ml redhat-fedora-test andrew cmu edu>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <6D509C847DFA9481230EBE99 shieldbreaker l33tskillz org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On 2004-05-17 at 12:11:23-05 William Lovaton <williama_lovaton coomeva com co> wrote:
> I'm going to use FC2 Final in my production server and I want to
> upgrade the network card to a Gigabit ethernet. What model is known
> to work well in FC2??


We've had good success with Intel cards.

If your server is PCI only (not PCI-X), try:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-106-112&depa=0

If you want PCI-X, try:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-106-117&depa=0

If you need PCI-X and two interfaces, try:

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-106-202&depa=0

All of these cards use Intel's open-source "e1000" driver.  (I believe
that Intel is still maintaining it, and that the kernel developers go
re-sync against Intel's latest version occasionally.)

--
James Ralston, Information Technology
Software Engineering Institute
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA




------------------------------


Message: 16
Date: 17 May 2004 14:19:41 -0500
From: William Lovaton <williama_lovaton coomeva com co>
Subject: Re: Gigabit ethernet cards
To: For testers of Fedora Core development releases
	<fedora-test-list redhat com>
Message-ID: <1084821581 4438 21 camel localhost localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain

Thank you guys for all the answers, fedora is really nice.

I have a haevy enterprise web application (Apache/PHP) running with 600
users (active sessions) on a 4x SMP Pentium III 550MHz each (RH9 -
2.4.20smp).  Right now the poor server is very stressed and I have
detected bottlenecks in the network (100Mbps) due to the high traffic
between the web server and the database.  So, I am planning to make the
leap from 100 to 1GB network.

Is there any advice from all of you regarding this? I have a good
experience with linux but this is the first time I am going to work in
the gigabit arena.

I am afraid that it is a bad assumption to think that 1Gb will improve
transfer speeds just like that.  Maybe there is some deeper
configuration / tuning left to be done after installing the new card.

Thanks,


-William






------------------------------

Message: 17
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 12:29:09 -0700
From: Thorsten <info thorko de>
Subject: VMware and Fedora Core 2
To: fedora-test-list redhat com
Message-ID: <1084822101 2061 21 camel localhost localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain

Hello guys
do anyone know how you can running the vmware 4.0.5 under fedora core 2?
I have installed the vmware 4.0.5 under fedora core 2 and the
installation worked without any problems. But if I start the
vmware-config.pl script it can't find the kernel sources. I have
installed the kernel sources which match with my running kernel. If I
start the vmware-config.pl script again it told me that the kernel
c-header files didn't matched with my running kernel. After that I
copied the version.h from /lib/modules/.... to my /usr/src/.... I
started the vmware-scripts again and it tolds me that the kernel address
space size from my kernel sources didn't match with my running kernel.
And so here we are. I have no clue what I can do know.
Have some of you a solution or did some of you tried this to install the
vmware under fedora core 2?
Thanks for helping
Ciao
Thorsten




------------------------------


--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list redhat com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list


End of fedora-test-list Digest, Vol 3, Issue 121 ************************************************

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page ? FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]