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

Re: Network device

On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 11:53:17AM +0200, Jan Fricke wrote:
> Michael Banck wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 09:59:01AM +0200, Jan Fricke wrote:
> >
> >>The standard mach kernel doesn't support the tulip device, so I tried
> >>to compile a kernel by myself. I used the sources from the CD-ROM
> >>"/src/gnumach-1.3.tar.gz" with the commands
> >
> >
> >BTW, the current gnumach package might be vastly more uptodate than the 
> >one on the CD-ROM, but I'm not sure.
> I couldn't find the tulip driver in the cvs-version, or a howto for 
> integration the kernel network device driver. Is anywhere a precompiled 
> mach kernel with tulip support?

I don't understand you completely I believe.

The current Debian package on ftp.debian.org (version 20040229) has
tulip.c in its source and --enable-tulip in it's configure line, so I
assume that it is included. The source package is also quite identical
to the current gnumach-1-branch of GNU Mach in CVS.

> tulip.c:v0.91g-ppc 7/16/99 becker@cesdis.gsfc.nasa.gov
> eth0: Digital DS21143 Tulip rev 65 at 0xd000, 00:00:1C:B0:67:EA, IRQ 10.
> eth0:  EEPROM default media type Autosense.
> eth0:  Index #0 - Media MII (#11) described by a 21142 MII PHY(3) block.
> eth0:  MII transceiver #8 config 3100 status 782d advertising 01e1.

Yeah, this is the version string of the current driver in GNU Mach 1.x
and it seems that your card gets detected.

AMS has whipped together a patch with the latest drivers from Donald
Becker, you can find his announcement with a link to the patch at


Maybe those drivers work better for you, please report back if you try
these out, they need testing.

> BTW: How can I get the boot messages after booting? (I forced a kernel 
> stop after the "eth0: ..." display.)

I believe you can do something like (not in single-user mode!)

cat /dev/klog > log

Wait a couple of seconds and hit ^C. Not sure whether this is the
correct procedure though.



Michael Banck
Debian Developer

Reply to: