Re: NIC recommendations (was Re: Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4...)

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

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/