From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 20:24:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 20:24:24 -0400 Received: from beasley.gator.com ([63.197.87.202]:57866 "EHLO beasley.gator.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 30 May 2001 20:24:17 -0400 From: "George Bonser" To: "Jeff Golds" Cc: "Linux Kernel" Subject: RE: [OFF-TOPIC] 4 ports ETH cards Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:23:56 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <3B15735E.5781700F@resilience.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I've been working with these boards for a couple months and thought they > were great. However, now it turns out that they won't fit into our > systems too well (a little too long). Does anyone have knowledge of > another brand that has a (slightly) smaller form factor? I did some > checking on Pricewatch but wasn't able to find anything that fit our > needs. > > TIA, > > -Jeff The Adaptec Quartet64 boards worked ok for me with 2.2 and the Starfire driver. Not sure if they are smaller (shorter) than the D-Link but they sure are a lot shorter than the old Tulip-based Adaptec quad boards. They are a bit pricey, though.