Re: Subject: Linux Hardware Nightmare!
From: Michael Black (blackm00_at_cam.org)
Date: 01/05/04
- Next message: Peter Köhlmann: "Re: Video Editing in Linux?"
- Previous message: Gerhard W. Gruber: "Re: Video Editing in Linux?"
- In reply to: Reza Roboubi: "Subject: Linux Hardware Nightmare!"
- Next in thread: Steve Wolfe: "Re: Subject: Linux Hardware Nightmare!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 5 Jan 2004 13:38:26 -0800
Reza Roboubi <rob@mail.requestfinder.com> wrote in message news:<3FF942D7.2040403@mail.requestfinder.com>...
> I do not at all think that Linux should support all (crappy) hardware
> that is out there. It is perfectly okay with me, if Linux supports a
> decent selection of properly designed hardware, and does it
> _flawlessly_. "Flawless" is what Linux, for the most part, is known
> for anyway.
>
> However, I have had this TERRIBLE X-freeze problem with my machine.
> After _much_ research, I realized that it is probably a bug (hardware
> or driver related) that will never go away :(
>
> You see, I have some VIA chips, and they seem buggy (or Linux does.)
> I found posts such as this:
> http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=linux+hardware+excuse+wearing+thin&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=20010329071729.B16495_auckland.ac.nz%40ns.sol.net&rnum=1
>
> plus _many_ more VIA "DMA bug" related posts. Could not read them
> all.
>
> I tried the suggestions that I could, like hdparm -d0 to turn off DMA on
> my disk. The bug _always_ persisted. This is despite the fact that
> my machine is _much_ better behaved under Win98!!
>
> NOW: That is behind me! I have decided to buy a new system. But
> understandably, I _really_ need a FULLY Linux compliant system. You
> know, something that doesn't crash. I know I'm not asking too much,
> and Linux can make me just as happy as it has made countless others.
>
> But I go to RedHat Hardware compatibility list, and voila: No
> motherboards listed:
> http://www.redhat.com/software/rhl9_hcl.html
> Please understand: ALL I am asking for, is an actual listing of
> product IDs that will not freeze/crash under Linux. But the RedHat
> site does not appear to list even _one_ RH9 compatible motherboard.
> So how can I _possibly_ be expected to make a decision?
>
My take on this is that too many people are coming to Linux
without grasping some key points. So they chase false paths, not
realizing that a different solution is what's needed.
I've seen people go through distributions, even downloading them
at 56K, to find one that "works" with their computer, when in fact
it's the kernel version and version of the X server (if running X)
that really determine whether or not hardware is supported. Some
distributions may be better than others in determining what software
you have (this is heresay, since I don't have real experience except
with Slackware), but that simply means the configuration is done
automatically.
I got a "new" computer two weeks ago, a hand me down, and the soundcard
is not supported by the distribution and version that I have on hand.
But I shouldn't expect that, given the card is more recent than
that version. It wouldn't do me a bit of good top randomly
try distributions, because only (and any) distribution with a recent
enough version of the kernel will support that card.
Ultimately, there is very little difference between distributions.
What extras they include varies, as does the installation program,
and even where they install and set up things. But the basic commands
will all be there no matter what the distribution, as will the hardware
that it runs on. If the version of the kernel does not support your
hardware, then there's your problem.
But since the issue of hardware compatibility has come up, it becomes
a bogey for people who worry about such things. It's easier to
assume a hardware incompatibility than some other matter.
Realistically, much of that compatibility issue arose in the early
days of Linux, when support, and useage, had not expanded sufficiently.
Now, hardware imcompatibility, with some exceptions, is related to
old hardware that nobody bothered to deal with back then, or hardware
so new that nobody's gotten around to dealing with it.
The same with the X server. If your video card is too new for
the version you are running, then there won't be support. Yet,
likely there is a way, since one can treat it as a generic video
card that everyone wants to be; you simply won't have the latest
features.
The longer something has been around, the more likely it has support,
and that it is fairly standard anyway. Take CDROM drives. In the early
days, there were various schemes for interfacing them, and the kernel
had to deal with them all (or not be compatible). But that's long
in the past. Now, they all use the same interface, and they all
use the same command set, so the only "incompatible" ones that will
be listed will be old. This makes the compatibility list look
out of date, when in reality it means there aren't any made nowadays
that aren't incompatible.
The real incompatibility issues are for hardware that is "win" based.
If it counts on the CPU for doing part of its job, like a Winmodem
or Winprinter or whatever, then it is far more likely to not be
compatible, and Linux may never support it. This is because
the manufacturer will not release information about the hardware,
and that makes it difficult to write software for (and since it's
brain dead anyway, why bother dealing with it?).
Once you realize that things are more the same than different,
then you can look for what separates them, and then that is
the key for finding compatibility.
Michael
- Next message: Peter Köhlmann: "Re: Video Editing in Linux?"
- Previous message: Gerhard W. Gruber: "Re: Video Editing in Linux?"
- In reply to: Reza Roboubi: "Subject: Linux Hardware Nightmare!"
- Next in thread: Steve Wolfe: "Re: Subject: Linux Hardware Nightmare!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
