On Saturday 30 March 2002 10:48, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 08:22:37PM -0500, Brian A. Seklecki wrote:
> > There's more than just BIOS support in there.  IIRC, 99% of the
> > time the card wouldn't work properly on an i386 with the default
> > settings.  From the menu system you have a great many features:
> >
> > *) Low level formatting
> > *) Low Level sector checking
>
> These 2 are not needed for normal operations :)

Maybe not, if its a dual boot machine, but there is nothing to
lose, and a bit to gain by doing a new low-level format when
you install the HD in a new machine. Sector checking is
highly desirable at the time a new OS is installed too.
>
> > *) The ability to adjust transfer rates, parity, disconnect, etc.
> > on a per ID basis
>
> The driver is supposed to negotiate this with the targets. you can
> hardwire it there but I think the default are the max, and let the
> driver negotiate.

The 2940 provides the facility to force a lower maximum than the
device would negociate. Some devices are just over-ambitions
about their capabilities. However, I admit I last saw a problem with
this in the days of 286's!
>
> > *) The ability to enable/disable on-board termination
>
> Is't the default "auto" (or something like that) ?
>
Even if it is, thats not necessarily a good thing, and may actually not
work with some devices (I hava CD writer that has probems unless
there is temination ON on the board and on internal and external
ends of the cabe, it may be "wrong" but it works. 

> > *) A great number of other features...
> >
> > ...I must investigate this further on my Ultra5 (assuming solaris 8
> > drivers exist).
> >
> > But my point is: all the functionality provided via that menu
> > system would have to be provide through other means -- perhaps a
> > userland utility?
>
> No, you don't need to have these functionalities for proper
> operation. Other SCSI adapters don't have these features and are
> usable anyway.

Most have DOS utilities or DIP switches to perform the functions, or 
are just inferior. Its not a coincidence that Adaptec costs more!

I would love a userland utility, if I had an Adaptec board. I wrote
the equivalent for a competitor under OS/2 a long time ago! Its not
very difficult to do.

regards

Andrew