Netgear ethernet cards no longer Tulip

[Christian Worley]

Donald Becker wrote:
> ...
> > Were the Netgear-labeled chips smaller rectangular chips instead of the
> > larger square chips typical of Tulips?  If so they are probably RTL 8139s,
> > which are grossly inferior.
> 
> CESDIS got a box of ten in yesterday (ordered in May for summer students!).
> They are relabeled PNIC-169 chips.
> 

I just got a batch of Netgear cards.  Rather than the 21140, the chip
is labeled "Netgear, NGMC169B, 9827, AN1639.1".  Are these the PNIC
chips?  Are they as good as the 21140?

Should I send these back?  Other's have said (in this thread) that the
Tulip v0.89 driver works fine with this chip.

If I should send these back, does anybody know of 100BT DEC 21140
based NIC cards as inexpensive as the Netgear cards have been?

> > > The FA310TX used to be a Tulip card, Netgear in their infinite wisdom has
> > > changed this with their RevD card, though they still ardently claim it's
> > > supported by linux, and provide a tulip.c file that is obviously the wrong
> > > driver.
> 
> It's a modified verison of tulip.c.
> They didn't include the GPL (required!) and they modified the driver without
> indicating that it was modified from the original (required by the GPL).
> 

I hope someday that HW manufacturers will maintain their own support
for Linux drivers for their hardware.

What can we do to nicely inform them of the proper procedures?  As
cathartic as it would be to see somebody fired for trying to sneak in
Donald's work as their own, it would be best in the long run if we
just were just able to communicate the right way to include public
domain Linux drivers in their setup package.

Chris
-- 
  When I die, please cast my ashes upon Bill Gates
   --for once, let him clean up after me!