On Sunday 23 December 2007, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: >Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Sunday 23 December 2007, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote: >>> Because the BIOS does not see the drive, there is no hd2 as far as >>> Grub is concerned. The only way to fix that is a BIOS upgrade, or a >>> SATA controller with its own BIOS. >> >> Note the expansion ROM is disabled, and I've played with wine quite a bit >> trying to make it run something, hell anything, from the little 3" cd that >> came with the card, but wine apparently can't even see the cd. And I >> don't know jack schidt about wine or winderz. Only one machine here with >> a copy of xp on it, hasn't been booted to xp but once in a year+, to see >> how googles sketchup is supposed to work. >> >> I just tried to mount the disk, but its not mountable by any known M$ >> idiom filesystem according to dmesg. >> >> There may be something on the disk that could enable the extension rom, if >> one could figure out what sort of a disk it is. I may take the card, and >> both disks to a winderz box and explore it there to see if there is some >> sort of a software switch to enable this, but that will be after Christmas >> now. > >Dumb question - is the CD bootable? No, I've left it in on several boots and it only causes a pause for the usual check the cd time. >If you can not mount it, then I >suspect that it might be. This would be necessary if you are only >using SATA drives, and you need to enable the ROM on the card before >you can install an OS. I did get it mounted, it turned out to be that with that kernel, my dvdwriter was on the missing list, that is now fixed. But wine cannot run the SETUP.EXE on the mounted disk, pathlist problems I think. >>> This is because of the order the drivers are loaded. The SATA drive >>> is on the first "SCSI" controller, and the PATA drives are on the >>> second "SCSI" controller. So the SATA controller is scanned forst >>> for drives, and then the PATA controller. Drive letters are assigned >>> in the order the drives are found. >> >> What determines this scan order in the bootfile? > >Well, if you only have the SATA drivers in initrd, then it will >always be first. You can also specify the order in modprobe.conf, >but you will probably have to rebuild the initrd before that will >take affect. (You will have to find the exact format of the alias >for the SCSI controllers, as I don't remember it off hand. >scsi_controller_0 or something like that.) Aha, so borrow from the f8 modprobe.conf and add it to my fc6 one now that I have it all as scsi. Rebuild the kernel without pata_amd & reboot for grins, or scowls as the case may be. Says he, hopefully... >Mikkel >From dmesg: [ 32.600304] SCSI subsystem initialized [ 32.608975] libata version 3.00 loaded. [ 32.610880] pata_amd 0000:00:09.0: version 0.3.10 [ 32.611034] PCI: Setting latency timer of device 0000:00:09.0 to 64 [ 32.611128] scsi0 : pata_amd [ 32.611314] scsi1 : pata_amd [ 32.612119] ata1: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x1f0 ctl 0x3f6 bmdma 0xf000 irq 14 [ 32.612247] ata2: PATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x170 ctl 0x376 bmdma 0xf008 irq 15 So its looking at the motherboard ide stuffs first. Do I need to get rid of pata_amd? But I'm going to lag this until such time as fetchmail gets caught up with gmail, which may take the rest of the day due to SA being involved. Thanks & Merry Christmas Mikkel. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) wolf, n.: A man who knows all the ankles.
