Subject: Re: Cabletron ethernet nubus and 1.6.1
To: None <port-mac68k@netbsd.org>
From: Taylor Raack <traack@mac.com>
List: port-mac68k
Date: 12/30/2003 22:33:22
Hi, OK, this looks like something that I should check out.  By the way, the error I am 
getting is "ae0 at nubus0 slot e: failed to determine size of RAM."  The card works 
fine under system 7.5.5, it just is not recognized by Netbsd.  

I was looking at these old posts:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28006
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28007
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28009
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28010
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28013
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/port-mac68k/message/28014

Thanks,
Taylor

--- In port-mac68k@yahoogroups.com, Frederick Bruckman <fredb@i...> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Taylor Raack wrote:
> 
> > >I just edited if_aereg.h and changed the values of CT_ to match this
> > card.
> >
> > >Here is what I used:
> > >ROM: 0x00030000
> > >RAM: 0x00010000
> > >REG: 0x00000000
> > >NetBSD 1.5 has the RAM and REG values reversed (For a different
> > card?)
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't know how to recompile a kernel, nor where to
> > locate this
> > header file or how to properly edit it.  Does anyone have a 1.6.1
> > kernel which has the
> > correct memory settings for the cabletron enet card, or could help me
> > in compiling
> > my own?
> 
> Here's a page on tracking current:
> 
>     http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/current/
> 
> if that helps.
> 
> There have been no changes to "src/sys/arch/mac68k/dev/if_aereg.h"
> since the cabletron support was first added, in August of 1998. The
> patches were provided by user John Marohn. He may have had a different
> card than you. As he declined to supply any "dmesg" output, there's no
> way to know.
> 
> If you want to see this fixed in NetBSD 2.0, you can help by answering
> a couple of questions...
> 
> 1) What error do you get? (Post "dmesg" output, please.)
> 
> 2) What post are you responding to?
> 
> 
> Frederick