Followup to: <200012302301.eBUN1IF01354@pobox.com>
By author: "Barry K. Nathan" <barryn@pobox.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> In any case, tulips have been more problematic for me than 8139, pcnet32,
> or 3c905c (whose reliability are all comparable IME). I've never tried
> eepro100, though. (Also, I'm speaking in terms of my experiences across
> all OS's which I've used the cards under, not just under Linux, although
> my Linux experiences are similar to the experiences I've had overall.)
>
I have used eepro100's on *a lot* of boxes, including *.kernel.org;
haven't had any problems whatsoever any time recently.
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:12 EST