On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:27:29 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: >On Sat, 01 Nov 2003 at 03:26 GMT, Mark Healey penned: >> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 18:08:05 -0900, Ken Irving wrote: >> >>>On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 06:17:52PM -0800, Mark Healey wrote: >>>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 18:03:59 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: ... >>>> >>>> >It all comes down to specific hardware configuration. Every system >>>> >has some hardware that it won't be prepared to use right out of the >>>> >box. >>>> >>>> The Broadcom 4400 is hardly rare. >>> >>>I haven't been following this saga, but googling for Broadcom 4400 >>>seems to suggest that the support for this chipset might be a very >>>recent thing. Perhaps you could get another network card for which >>>drivers do exist, get the system running, and then resume your effort >>>to get the Broadcom working. >>> >>>It is reasonable to expect some difficulties in building a system with >>>barely supported hardware, however non-rare it might be. >> >> I thought of that but it is a dual boot setup (controled with a >> physical switch) and I would have to reconfigure the other OS. > >What's the other OS? When I threw in an external card to bootstrap >linux on my dual-boot box, win2k was happy as a clam to use two ethernet >cards while they were available.
Redhat. >> The broadcom is also on the mobo which means extra hassle. > >It's 99.9% likely that you can disable the broadcom in your BIOS. >There's no reason you should have to -- linux will ignore the network >card unless it has a module for it, and windows will keep on using it -- >but if you want to, the capability should be there. I'm hoping to avoid going into BIOS everytime I boot into an OS different from the previous one. Mark Healey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Giving debian a chance. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
