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

Bug#408818: cool




On Jan 28, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Phill Thorpe wrote:

On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 03:09 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
On Monday 29 January 2007 02:41, Phill Thorpe wrote:
I dont think that you read it correctly.
This install did not detect my nic at first, it only detected my nic
when I booted with:
install interface=eth1
Which I dont believe should be necessary.

No, the "interface=eth1" option does not have _any_ effect on detection of
NICs, only on which one is _used_.

So, unless you can point us to a real problem with NIC detection/ selection during your initial install, there is no problem as far as we can tell.

Cheers,
FJP

So I wonder why it detected the wrong one, when I only have one nic.

regards
     Phill.


Does looking closely at what Phill supplied for his original report help any?:

Output of lspci -nn and lspci -vnn:
phill:/home/phill# lspci -nn
... <snip> ...
00:12.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT6102 [Rhine-II] [1106:3065] (rev 7c)
... <snip>

Output of lspci -vnn:
phill:/home/phill# lspci -vnn
...<snip>...
00:12.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT6102 [Rhine-II] [1106:3065] (rev 7c)
        Subsystem: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. Unknown device [1043:80ed]
        Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 217
        I/O ports at d800 [size=256]
        Memory at febff800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256]
        Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 2
...<snip>

I'm not enough of a PCI hardware guru to know if this is going to be recognized as a NIC. Anybody else?

Also, I saw a bunch of PCI bridges and so on. Is is possible that the NIC is on the far side of one of them and that's confusing the issue? Or am I talking total nonsense?

Just a thought...

Rick




Reply to: