Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay

[Bart Silverstrim]

On Mar 29, 2005, at 1:50 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:

> Chris writes:
>
>> No - NOT the PC - the hardware that's in question. The Adaptec WITH 
>> the
>> modified code. I'm willing to bet, it's not.
>
> Should I check for restrictions on chipset temperature, relative
> humidity, and atmospheric pressure as well?

Are you really this obtuse or do you just play you are on the Internet?

>> Again - I doubt that that perticulare Adaptec WITH the modifide code 
>> is
>> listed. Now I'll bet an untouched Adaptec is.
>
> Nothing on the list says either way.

I'm sure they're going to list every permutation of code.

If it doesn't say, the list is referring to the generic 
off-the-f'ing-shelf version.

The firmware you have ISN'T.  You bloody POSTED that in the version 
output!  It's a MODIFIED FIRMWARE.

>> No - not worthless - NOT SUPPORTED. Just like the HCL that MS puts 
>> out.
>
> There are lots of configurations unsupported by Microsoft that will
> still run Windows without problems.

Very good.  And if you take one of them whining about a problem, they 
point at the list and say, "Tough Sh*t."

If it works, great.  If it doesn't, oh well.  It wasn't previously 
tested and the programmers aren't going to test on every bit of 
hardware in existence.  I mean, DUH.

>> Another thing to understand, most of the HP added code is related to
>> SNMP. That's what HP/Compaq does. Now, you also need to realize that 
>> the
>> drivers under NT talk to HAL (Hardware Abstration Layer) which 
>> happenes
>> to be far more forgiving of altered code then something under Unix 
>> where
>> the driver talks directly to the hardware.
>
> Are you saying that Windows NT has a superior design?

Yes, that's exactly what he's saying when properly twisted.  If 
"superior design" consists solely of ignoring problems or ignoring 
glitches in hardware, then you have a real gem.  You should go out and 
reinstall Windows on that server and leave this list in peace.