Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!

• Previous message: Peter Wemm: "Re: Problems with AMD64 and 8 GB RAM?"
• In reply to: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Next in thread: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Reply: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:26:37 -0800 (PST)
To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com>

--- Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Mars Trading wrote:
>
> > I think you may be on to something here. Not that
> >I'm an expert, BTW. If I remember correctly,
> > 4.11 doesn't use device.hints;
> > device irq's and stuff were all included in the
> > kernel configuration.
> >
> > This is no longer the case with 5.x which uses
> > /boot/device.hints to
> > tell where attached devices are. But how does one
> > edit device.hints on a boot cd?
>
> You set the variables from the loader with the "set"
> command. For example, if you need to add this to
> device.hints:
>
> hint.ata.0.at="isa"
>
> type this on the loader command line:
>
> set hint.ata.0.at="isa"
>
> On 4.x the hints were configured so that it would
> still probe the ISA
> resources if the PCI attachments failed. On 5.x this
> is likely not the
> case. However on 5.x that "disabled by BIOS"
> message is gone so it should
> attach if that particular message was the reason
> before. However someone
> clipped that message from the output so I don't even
> know why its failing to attach in the first place.

I've got a few other 5.3-Stable (5.4-PreRelease) PCs
here. On these machines I get:

$ grep hint.ata.0 /boot/device.hints
hint.ata.0.at="isa"
hint.ata.0.port="0x1F0"
hint.ata.0.irq="14"
$ grep hint.ata.0 /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC.hints
hint.ata.0.at="isa"
hint.ata.0.port="0x1F0"
hint.ata.0.irq="14"

So it's already there! I suppose it's the same with
the 5.3 installation floppies, or isn't it?

Or would me setting it manually at the loader prompt,
have a different effect?

> So its said again ..
>
> Use a different ATA controller. Please. The RZ1000
> series should not be
> used under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER.

I've got not really a choice here. This is a 10 year
old Pentium-1 PC, which I would like to use. I'm not
a hardware expert, but your advice would mean to
throw this PC away? Or can I replace the ATA
controller easily myself?

I have already put this machine under moderate load
and recompiled/installed a new world/kernel without
any problems. Apparently 4.11 knows how to bypass
the flaws of this buggy ATA controller. At least
that's my impression.
Would 5.3 or 5.4 do this as-good here?

Regards,
Rob.

                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

• Previous message: Peter Wemm: "Re: Problems with AMD64 and 8 GB RAM?"
• In reply to: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Next in thread: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Reply: Doug White: "Re: buggy ATA controller: I can install 4.11, but not 5.3 !?!"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]