Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!cc.usu.edu!jrd From: jrd@cc.usu.edu (Joe R. Doupnik) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Subject: Message-ID: <1991Jun14.162542.48110@cc.usu.edu> Date: 14 Jun 91 22:25:42 GMT References: <1991Jun12.222740.1053@aai.com> <1991Jun13.225207.15089@dobag.in-berlin.de> Organization: Utah State University Lines: 35 In article <1991Jun13.225207.15089@dobag.in-berlin.de>, lumpi@dobag.in-berlin.de (Joern Lubkoll) writes: > leo@aai.com writes: >>What does this problem sound like? My guess is that it has to do >>with the High Performance Disk Driver using the 1542B in bus >>mastering mode. Does ISC do this? If so, have all these board >>manufacturers made the same mistakes? Other than this >>problem(!), the systems run fine. If you have a baby-size >>motherboard that you use with ISC 2.2.1 and a 1542B, you might >>want to try a similar test. Am I the only one to see this? > > Never had any Problems with the following bioa/chipset-combinations: > > 80386SX, no Cache, Intel, AMI (ugly slow) > 80386-20, no Cache, Chips/Technologies, AMI > 80386-25, no Cache, Chips/Technologies, AMI > 80386-25, Cache (Intel), Ti-Chipset, Phoenix > 80386-33, Cache (Intel), Ti-Chipset, Phoenix > 80386-33, Cache (TTL), Opti-Chipset, Ami > 80386-33, Cache, Chips/Technologies, AMI > 80486-25, Cache (TTL), Opti-Chipset, Award > > I had about 50 Boards last year matching the above specifications, > every type of board ran fine with isc 2.02/2.2/2.21 > > No board tested worked properly with Intel SysVR4, 2.0. > > jl > -- -------------------------------- Here's one board which does work with AT&T's SVR4 2.1: 80386-33, Cache (Austec), TI chipset, AMI Bios It's sold by CUI, 1680 Civic Center Drive, Suite 101, Santa Clara, CA 95050, 1-(408) 241-9170. 16 SIMM sockets too. I found this after testing a bunch of boards with the AT&T startup floppies; most boards flunked. Joe D.