28-Mar-2024 10:43 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[News] OpenPCI 1.0 and OpenPCI 8139 Device 1.0 releasedANN.lu
Posted on 09-Feb-2003 19:31 GMT by Benjamin Vernoux (Titan) (Edited on 2003-02-09 23:52:34 GMT by Christophe Decanini)41 comments
View flat
View list
On the OpenPCI Project WWW Page (in English only):
OpenPCI library 1.0 released
openpci_8139.device 1.0 released (Fast Ethernet(10/100Mb) driver) The OpenPCI library is a wrapper for use lot of PCI Bus on :

Amiga/Amithlon/Pegasos (GrexA1200/A4000 (require cybpci.library), Prometheus (require prometheus.library v2.x), Amithlon (require powerpci.library v1.76), Pegasos (require Pegasos+MorphOS)).

The OpenPCI library 1.0 is officialy released for public, with a Fast Ethernet (10/100Mb) driver : openpci_8139.device v1.0 is for Realtek RTL8139 B/C/D/E chipset. Tested with Miami/MiamiDX.

Only the 68k version of OpenPCI library is released but soon the native PPC MOS version will be available with native MOS PPC 8139 device.
OpenPCI Project WWW Page (in English only)

List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Lasse Bodilsen09-Feb-2003 20:44 GMT
Comment 2Anonymous09-Feb-2003 23:20 GMT
Comment 3darklite09-Feb-2003 23:24 GMT
Comment 4Christophe Decanini10-Feb-2003 03:47 GMT
Comment 5reflect10-Feb-2003 07:50 GMT
Comment 6Kjetil10-Feb-2003 08:14 GMT
Comment 7Kjetil10-Feb-2003 08:20 GMT
Comment 8joe10-Feb-2003 08:26 GMT
Comment 9Anon10-Feb-2003 08:39 GMT
Comment 10alan buxey10-Feb-2003 09:05 GMT
Comment 11Jedi10-Feb-2003 09:53 GMT
Comment 12Bill Hoggett10-Feb-2003 09:56 GMT
Comment 13Lando10-Feb-2003 10:17 GMT
Comment 14Benjamin Vernoux10-Feb-2003 11:07 GMT
Comment 15Benjamin Vernoux10-Feb-2003 11:13 GMT
Comment 16redrumloa10-Feb-2003 11:37 GMT
Comment 17darklite10-Feb-2003 14:22 GMT
Comment 18Neil Cafferkey10-Feb-2003 17:48 GMT
Comment 19alan buxey10-Feb-2003 18:48 GMT
Comment 20Anonymous10-Feb-2003 20:44 GMT
Comment 21Rat10-Feb-2003 20:51 GMT
Comment 22Alkis Tsapanidis10-Feb-2003 21:10 GMT
Comment 23Alkis Tsapanidis10-Feb-2003 21:12 GMT
Comment 24Alkis Tsapanidis10-Feb-2003 21:17 GMT
Comment 25Bill Hoggett10-Feb-2003 22:09 GMT
Comment 26Adam Kowalczyk10-Feb-2003 23:43 GMT
Comment 27Joël EHRET11-Feb-2003 06:37 GMT
Comment 28Rat11-Feb-2003 08:28 GMT
Comment 29Rat11-Feb-2003 08:31 GMT
Comment 30Kelly Samel11-Feb-2003 11:31 GMT
Comment 31Bill Hoggett11-Feb-2003 11:42 GMT
Comment 32Alkis Tsapanidis11-Feb-2003 11:44 GMT
Comment 33Alkis Tsapanidis11-Feb-2003 11:48 GMT
Comment 34Chris Hodges11-Feb-2003 12:48 GMT
Comment 35luft Mysza :)11-Feb-2003 16:41 GMT
OpenPCI 1.0 and OpenPCI 8139 Device 1.0 released : Comment 36 of 41ANN.lu
Posted by Rat on 11-Feb-2003 23:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Bill Hoggett):
>OK. Bad example. However, since Elbox have proved incapable
>of writing such a driver so far, and since no one else has
>produced one either, it would seem there may be technical
>reasons why no 3Com support has been achievable for the
>Amiga platform.

So, until Elbox writes a driver, you take it for granted that Elbox is not capable of writing such a driver? And there is no point in writing such a driver? Very comfortable, congratulations... Let Elbox write drivers, and when they are available, the OpenPCI author will rewrite them to other PCI solutions.

The best thing is that the OpenPCI author signed NDA with Elbox and got the MediatorSDK developer's documentation for writing new drivers for Mediator.
But what he is doing now? Instead of writing any NEW drivers he is trying to spread away the current Mediator drivers to other PCI solutions, which are not supported by their producer. BTW. As VGR posted today the Prometheus designer and programmer informed that he would not work any more on any drivers to his PCI solution.

>So? They care for the developers _THEY_ can profit from. Period.

It's rather normal that they care for these developers, who write drivers for Mediator and not for these, who do nothing for Mediator users.

>Picasso don't support Elbox users because
>(a) Elbox users are not registered and

And what about the users who are registered?

>(b) it would mean supporting Elbox who are the only hardware company
>who have refused to comply with the clear P96 requirement that any
>hardware that ships with Picasso96 drivers _must_ be licensed, not
>to mention the P96 development kit license.

1. Elbox does not produce any hardware on which Picasso works (any graphic card).
2. Elbox is the only one company, which did not use help of the P96 team and wrote on its own drivers to Voodoo cards, which work with P96 system.
3. Picasso 'must_ be licensed' requirement is illegal.
4. Elbox doesn't distribute the P96 system.

>Even Amithlon shipped with a P96 license, and they didn't even make
>hardware. Why do Elbox think they are exempt?

Amithlon is a software package including the complete Picasso96 system. Why should anyone wonder that the P96 authors receive money from sales of the Amithlon package?

>Elbox apologists seem to be everywhere, like all those who said
>anyone who exposed their policy of hiding trojans in their software
>must be a pirate.

You cannot doubt that the person who published this code was dealing with pirating and hacking Elbox driver.

>Elbox only care about Elbox. The minute they lose their lead
>as hardware expansion providers they will drop it like a hot potato,
>and stick two fingers up at any of their users who complain about
>their loyalty being betrayed.

You have mixed up something.
Dropping potatoes are all these companies who tried to compete with Elbox. This may be the reason for aggression in their competitors or former competitors.
Jump...
#40 Alkis Tsapanidis
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 37Rat11-Feb-2003 23:08 GMT
Comment 38Rat11-Feb-2003 23:10 GMT
Comment 39Iggy Drougge12-Feb-2003 06:27 GMT
Comment 40Alkis Tsapanidis13-Feb-2003 11:39 GMT
Comment 41Alkis Tsapanidis13-Feb-2003 11:41 GMT
Back to Top