I have the exact same motherboard and had to do exactly the same thing, except I didn't know I could renable Enhanced, thanx! Thanks, Michael Robinson (mrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) (www.fuzzymuzzle.com) -----Original Message----- From: fedora-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fedora-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dean Mumby Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:16 AM To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Giving up on Linux... I have a intel d865perl mb with hyperthreading , sata , and all the same features , i installed fedora , redhat 9, etc with legacy mode and then simply switched to enhanced mode and i am running fine. did you check wether your system had enabled dma hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffer-cache reads: 3568 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1784.00 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 166 MB in 3.00 seconds = 55.33 MB/sec not slow at all xyzzy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >... for the foreseeable future on my home system. > >My home system is an ASUS PVP800-VM motherboard which has hi-speed USB, ACPI, >Pentium IV with hyperthread, S-ATA, Intel Extreme 2 graphics (865G chipset). > >I also have an antique Adaptec 2930 SCSI card for my LS-2000 scanner. > >Redhat 9 install disks won't even boot on this machine unless I disable the >Enhanced IDE (<-- totally bogus!!) ... Fedora Core 1 is about the same. > >I decided on FC1 because it uses a later kernel (2.4.22 ... 24?) which seems >to support hyperthread and S-ATA better. When I finally got FC1 installed (I >had to disable Enhanced IDE, install, compile a custom kernel and then >re-enable Enhanced IDE), it was horribly SLOOOOOOW... running a shell in X >and pasting a long command line took forever to complete. > >I figured that this might be due to the graphics driver, so I updated the >graphics driver from Intel and then X crashed with a segmentation fault in >the closed source part of the driver when attempting to start the X server. >Even changing back to the original driver in the XF86Config didn't fix the >segfault. Gotta reinstall? Who needs this? What a nightmare. > >The issue here is that Windows XP runs "out-of-the-box" on this system without >problems and it is FAST, once it boots. > >I could try the 2.6 kernel (and I have a LOT of experience with computers), >but what's the use? The 2.6 kernel is not ready for prime-time, not by a >long shot, and neither, it seems, is Linux in general. > >I have seen too many bugs and posts on these topics about SMP/hyperthread/ACPI >and other issues that cause the system to lock up after a time of running or >not run at all and no fixes seem to be in sight - maybe because these >problems are intractable without inside information about ACPI and other >things that Intel will give to Microsoft but not to Open Source developers. >Maybe Redhat just doesn't care. Who knows? > >I pity the average user that tries to install and run Linux on their latest >hardware. If I, as an experienced software engineer, throw up my hands, what >would a relative newbie who just needs the system to work do? > >I have real problems seeing how Linux is going to make it to the desktop by >2005 with these kinds of road-blocks. > >Sad. > > > > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
