Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!uwm.edu!homer.alpha.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!buffnet2.buffnet.net!usenet From: bdj@buffnet.net (James Blackmoore) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc Subject: Re: Adaptec licensing Date: 6 Sep 1995 23:55:40 GMT Organization: BuffNET Lines: 34 Message-ID: <42lcds$kjf@buffnet2.buffnet.net> References: <42f6uu$6ng@hops.entertain.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: buffnet3.buffnet.net X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.2 In article <42f6uu$6ng@hops.entertain.com>, dwatson@abwam.com (Darryl Watson) says: > >The only two things that are short-comings of BSDi, as far as I am >concerned, are: > >1) lack of multi-processor support. This ain't a biggie, since BSDi >cranks on Intel platforms. I've got an EISA 486-66 that out-performs >lots of Pentium-based systems running SCO or Solaris. At least, it >does for the things I need it to do. > >2) No Adaptec support for greater than 174x controllers. > >#2 is a total bummer... I understand that Adaptec won't license the >necessary info to BSDi without the condition that they (Adaptec) can >jerk the license any time they want. Unfortunately, Adaptec makes the >most popular controller cards on the market, and they perform well. > Hi. Well, #1 I really can't comment on, but as for #2 we've had the same problems as well. We're running an HP LF 5/66 server amd it has the adaptec 274x (or somesuch, I have my specs elsewere), which my hardware engineer claims is the new standard (he also claims that the adaptec 174x are no longer being produced). Berkeley informed us that they are planning on supporting it, but not until later this quarter (!). Anyways, the end result is that we had to shut off our internal adaptec and drop the cash for a pair of buslogic controllers. I dunno what the situation really is, but that's what I've heard from them in the past week... Regards, James