[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cobalt-developers] Re: Replacing eepro100 with e100, need some .h source files
- Subject: Re: [cobalt-developers] Re: Replacing eepro100 with e100, need some .h source files
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri Dec 7 12:02:29 2001
- Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
- List-id: Discussion Forum for developers on Sun Cobalt Networks products <cobalt-developers.list.cobalt.com>
"William L. Thomson Jr." wrote:
> So I would ask in return, any reason why Sun/Cobalt decided to go with
> eepro100 instead of e100?
General consensus amongst kernel mailing list is that e100 sucks. Further,
when we started hacking on eepro100.c, e100 was not available, I believe.
Please, let me know how it works, but be sure to get actual numbers! I'd
like to see how our eepro100 compares to e100 on a bi-directional (1
interface) full duplex 100 MBit test.
Tim
--
Tim Hockin
Systems Software Engineer
Sun Microsystems, Cobalt Server Appliances
thockin@xxxxxxx