On 17 Aug 2003, Stephen Liu wrote: > Hi Joe, > > On Sun, 2003-08-17 at 17:05, Joe wrote: > > > >Sorry I don't understand "fully transparent to the OS" > > > > > Meaning the raid hardware just makes it look like a normal drive to the OS - > > Yes, > > Running DOS - cd\C: or cd\D: works > Running Win2K - Drive-C and Drive-D both are visible > > > > >I have tried to install RH9.0 after having installed Win2K. It asked > > >where to install RH9.0, hda or hdc. There was not hdb therefore I > > >hesitate to proceed. > > > > > So rh sees a primary disk on the primary controller, and a primary disk > > on the secondar controller - but not a secondary disk on the primary > > controller, are you sure you have such a setup? > > Yes. > There are 2 slots on the Controller and each drive is connected to each > one slot separately. Do you mean hda and hdc representing each drive? > Why hdb is missing? Because, in addition to having two slots on the controller, you can (and usually do) have two connectors on each cable connected to those slots. The card doesn't treat IDE disk assignments any differently than built-in, on-the-motherboard IDE controllers do: IDE0=first IDE "slot" or connector on the card (or motherboard, etc). IDE1=second IDE "slot" or connector on the card (or motherboard, etc). IDE0-Disk 1-hda IDE0-Disk 2-hdb IDE1-Disk 1-hdc IDE1-Disk 2-hdd If you were to take your "D:" drive off of the second "slot", set it to slave, and put it on the second connector of the cable attached to the first "slot", you'd find that you have hda and hdb, instead of hda and hdc. -- Mike Burger http://www.bubbanfriends.org Visit the Dog Pound II BBS telnet://dogpound2.citadel.org or http://dogpound2.citadel.org:2000 To be notified of updates to the web site, send a message to: site-update-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with a message of: subscribe -- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
