Re: NIC recommendations (was Re: Repeatable 2.4.0-test13-pre4...)

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <[e-mail]>
By author:    "Barry K. Nathan" <[e-mail]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>  
> In any case, tulips have been more problematic for me than 8139, pcnet32,
> or 3c905c (whose reliability are all comparable IME). I've never tried
> eepro100, though. (Also, I'm speaking in terms of my experiences across
> all OS's which I've used the cards under, not just under Linux, although
> my Linux experiences are similar to the experiences I've had overall.)
> 

I have used eepro100's on *a lot* of boxes, including *.kernel.org;
haven't had any problems whatsoever any time recently.

	-hpa
-- 
<[e-mail]> at work, <[e-mail]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt