George Bonser wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Philip Thiem wrote:
>
> > You'd be surprises how often that can happen. I purchase from a
> > wholesaler, and they don't check to see if the drives are good, though
> > they have allways been good about replacing them. Many resalers are
> > similar,
You'd be surprises how often that can happen. I purchase from a
wholesaler, and they don't check to see if the drives are good, though
they have allways been good about replacing them. Many resalers are
similar, though some do do some testing.
Philip Thiem
Michael Stone wrote:
>
> Quoting [EMA
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sat, Oct 17, 1998 at 01:11:25PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> > In my case, no, it is definately a problem with the linux ide driver and
> > how it handles UDMA drives. I have seen exactly the same problem on two
> > different systems with two dif
On Sat, Oct 17, 1998 at 01:11:25PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> In my case, no, it is definately a problem with the linux ide driver and
> how it handles UDMA drives. I have seen exactly the same problem on two
> different systems with two different hard drives of different manufacture
> with dif
>>
>> BTW, I have configured it down to one single error message that I can't
>> seem to shake:
>>
>> hdc: write_intr: status=0xff { Busy }
>> ide: reset: success
>>
>> This is what is leading me to believe that the driver is either attempting
>> a transaction before an earlier one completed ( i
> On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
>
> > just a few ideas.
> > is your hd the slave or master, and if the master is there a slave
> > connected to the same cable?
>
> It doesn't matter. I have tried it as master, slave, master with a slave
> and master alone ... no change.
>
Hi
just a few ideas.
is your hd the slave or master, and if the master is there a slave
connected to the same cable?
Is the ide interface connected to the ISA or PCI bus? Belive it or
not some pci motherboards still have the ide interface connected to
the ISA side! (some have only the secondary i
I am using a maxtor udma 5.4GB drive on an intel TX (triton II) mb
with a K6-233 cpu. I have run 2.0.33 and now are using 2.0.34 with no
problems. Previously used a maxtor 2.0 gb udma drive, again no
problems.
--
I get the same exact results wit
Sean Johnson wrote:
>
> I get the same exact results with my PPro system (Intel 440FX chipset) and
> Maxtor 7.2GB UDMA drive. This even happens under the developmental kernel
> 2.1.122 which I use for the better SMP handling. I've asked questions
> before on newsgroups and such as to what could
I get the same exact results with my PPro system (Intel 440FX chipset) and
Maxtor 7.2GB UDMA drive. This even happens under the developmental kernel
2.1.122 which I use for the better SMP handling. I've asked questions
before on newsgroups and such as to what could be causing this behavior, or
if
10 matches
Mail list logo
