On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 01:01:28AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On 3/20/06, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 03:39:45PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > > Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > > > > So what do you people suggest in such cases: > > > > 1) Intel 1000MT NIC sucks, throw it away ? > > > > 2) Unh! Why don't you change to Debian Unstable ? > > > > 3) Buddy! We are all volunteers. Go and roll your own kernel with the > > > > patches ? > > > > 4) Wait! That hardware isn't officially supported by us. Build only machines > > > > which are known to work with Debian Stable? > > > 5) etch beta 2 was released last week with support for your hardware > > If this is the issue I think it is, sarge does support the hardware but the > > kernel isn't configured to support large frames on it in GigE mode. I'm not > > aware that this issue has been resolved yet in the kernels for etch either; > > the issue had earlier been clouded by concerns over the reliability of this > > kernel configure option, owing to confusion with a similarly named option > > for a different card. > Would that really be *the* issue for a NAT box? No, probably not. I guess this is about some unrelated issue specific to a particular e1000 model. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature