Jeff Garzik wrote:

> >      * 2.4.0-test8 pcmcia is unusable in fall forms (kernel, mixed, or
> >        dhinds code) (David Ford)
>
> "fall forms"?
>
> David clearly has problems w/ pcmcia, but it is not at all as broken as
> he makes it out to be:  all my cardbus laptops boot and work.
>
>
> >      * PCMCIA/Cardbus hangs (Basically unusable - Hinds pcmcia code is
> >        reliable)
>
> Again "whatever".  The CardBus code is definitely usable.  It is not
> mature, but saying it is "basically unusable" is wildly inaccurate.

The qualifiers I reported are not included above so don't take it to mean
wide ranging.

I reported pcmcia in all forms was broken for test8 on -my hardware-.

Other kernels such as test10-prex that I'm on now are workable with dhinds
pcmcia.  I sent you all the requested information you asked for in several
forms.  The kernel's idea of the the sockets just doesn't work...again, on
-my hardware-.

It doesn't matter what voodoo you practice, all of the kernels in the last
year have been unable to drive -my hardware- in any sort of stable fashion.
Recent kernels just can't figure out IRQs for the sockets.

David's package works in all situations except for the combined ne2k/modem
that I reported earlier and the ray_cs in similar fashion.

For the second report, when the kernel did figure out IRQs for the sockets,
plugging in a card sometimes killed all software interrupts.  I.e. hardware
responded such as caps, screen blank/active etc, but no mouse or key events
made it past the kernel.  Unplugging a card or putting it in socket 0
normally caused a plethura of unending OOPSes or another hang on the
insertion.

Ted, please put my qualifier back in, "On this NEC Versa LX laptop", I don't
want my reports taken out of context. :)

-d


--
"The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an
eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was
'committed'."