Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!nntp.gmd.de!nntp.darmstadt.gmd.de!news.th-darmstadt.de!fauern!news.tu-chemnitz.de!irz401!uriah.heep!bonnie.heep!not-for-mail
From: j@bonnie.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: IRQ 9 unsafe?
Date: 5 Jul 1995 13:03:33 +0200
Organization: Private U**x site, Dresden.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <3tdri5$fdb@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de>
References: <gztQkHQ@quack.kfu.com> <3t940q$cf4@anshar.shadow.net> <3tc4dn$9k2@csugrad.cs.vt.edu>
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.109.108.139
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Jeff Aitken <jaitken@vt.edu> wrote:
>: IRQ 9 is indeed a cascaded IRQ 2.
>
>Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly does that mean?
You don't need to care if it's working.
> I've been using
>IRQ9 for the parallel port for some time with no apparent trouble.
>... Will this
>have side effects?
Not unless your video card is also using it.
--
cheers, J"org private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
http://www.sax.de/~joerg/
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)