On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > The RZ1000 is *dangerous*! We are doing no favours by making it run.. :-/
> > IMHO It is better to loose the user by not playing ball than to corrupt
> > their data or run unreliably and make them hate us f
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 07:01:59PM +0100, Soren Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That particular chip is so broken in so obscure ways, that most of the
> "fixes" floating around doesn't. Its just plain broken, and should be
> avoided totally and at all cost...
It will be nice to let the user
It seems Robert Watson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
>
> > The RZ1000 is *dangerous*! We are doing no favours by making it run.. :-/
> > IMHO It is better to loose the user by not playing ball than to corrupt
> > their data or run unreliably and make them hate us for it.
> >
>
On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Peter Wemm wrote:
> The RZ1000 is *dangerous*! We are doing no favours by making it run.. :-/
> IMHO It is better to loose the user by not playing ball than to corrupt
> their data or run unreliably and make them hate us for it.
>
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/pc-hardware-faq/
> 3. Get pissed off with FreeBSD and go elsewhere.
don't worry I am sure that quite a few user have left already.
This kind of situation reminds of when I
accidently broke the gus max backwards compatibility.
An old friend of mine sent me a quiet note stating that
he switch OSes cause he cou
At 07:40 AM 12/14/99 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
>Greg Lehey wrote:
> > On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 23:32:27 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> > > [missing attribution to Greg Childers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > >> Except that ATA currently does not work on my system. So I assume I'm not
> > >> the only o
On 1999-Dec-12 05:54:12 +1100, Greg Lehey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 19:01:49 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> The ata driver has been available for you and other to test for a long
>> time.
>
>Oh. Somehow I missed this. Sure, I saw commits, but I can't recall a
Greg Lehey wrote:
> On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 23:32:27 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> > [missing attribution to Greg Childers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> >> Except that ATA currently does not work on my system. So I assume I'm not
> >> the only one.
> >
> > Actually, to quote from your original messa
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 22:44:36 +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> It seems Nate Williams wrote:
>>> If half as much energy was spent adding the missing bits of functionality
>>> to the new systems as people have been spending complaining it then we'd be
>>> there ages ago.
>>
>> Not true. It
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 0:02:47 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai wrote:
>> -On [19991209 16:03], Greg Lehey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 8 December 1999 at 20:23:24 +0100, Brad Knowles wrote:
This is -CURRENT. It pains me to say it, but any
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 19:04:33 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Williams writes:
>>> What we need here is a commitment to these new initiatives, not a lot of
>>> fence-sitting and clutching our knitting to our chests.
>>
>> If all our users were devel
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 23:32:27 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> [missing attribution to Greg Childers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>> Except that ATA currently does not work on my system. So I assume I'm not
>> the only one.
>
> Actually, to quote from your original message:
>
>> According to technica
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 17:11:53 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Lehey writes:
>
>> We're getting off track again: the real issue is that you shouldn't
>> completely replace old drivers with new, better written, less buggy
>> drivers which have signifi
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 17:54:14 -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
>>> If half as much energy was spent adding the missing bits of functionality
>>> to the new systems as people have been spending complaining it then we'd be
>>> there ages ago.
>>
>> Not true. It doesn't take a disk expert to compl
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 0:55:15 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Ken
> naway writes:
>
>> No-one (as far as I can see) is objecting to making ata the default (which
>> it already is), and to kill wd in some number of weeks. Why can't you just
>> do t
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 2:09:48 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Williams writes:
In a few days time the wd driver will be retired from FreeBSDs
i386 architecture.
>>>
>>> Given that the ATA driver just went active a fe
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 12:39:15 +1000, Stephen McKay wrote:
>
> But that shouldn't stop us from moving forward with the ata driver. I
> think that a small slowing of the pace, and a bit more understanding toward
> those with unusual hardware will help. And I support PHK's hard line
> s
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 15:03:19 +1000, Stephen McKay wrote:
> On Friday, 10th December 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>> The same mentality that made the CAM cutover a "debacle" is making the
>> ata cutover a "debacle".
>
> This "mentality" might be an unavoidable part of human nature. I fou
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 19:19:43 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Williams writes:
>
And your point is? I'm a user, not a developer. If I wanted to be a
developer, I'd have written my own device driver. I want to *USE*
FreeBSD, not dev
p
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 18:28:42 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Dieter Rothacker wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 14:21:25 +0800 (WST), Michael Kennett wrote:
>>
>>> Note that wd1 is not present. This caused a mild hickup when rebooting the
>>> new kernel, since the new ata controller assigne
On Friday, 10 December 1999 at 19:01:49 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Williams writes:
>>> In a few days time the wd driver will be retired from FreeBSDs
>>> i386 architecture.
>>
>> Given that the ATA driver just went active a few minutes ago, I think a
>>
On Saturday, 11 December 1999 at 8:52:28 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
>> : You overlook one simple thing here: If we want the ata driver tested,
>> : we need to make existing kern
On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 15:45:15 -0600, Anthony Kimball wrote:
>
> What I didn't like about CAM was that I lost my tape drive. Since I
> had all my backups and archives on DAT, it felt like a bad thing.
What do you mean you "lost" your tape drive? CAM has included a tape
driver almost from day
What I didn't like about CAM was that I lost my tape drive. Since I
had all my backups and archives on DAT, it felt like a bad thing.
Which reminds me -- can anyone spare a 2.1 CD? Please send me private
mail, if so: I foolishly neglected to convert to CD, and now I can't
find 2.1 on the web an
> "Mike" == Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> The "right" solution is and has always been to name your
Mike> disks and mount them by name. Once devfs is a reality,
Mike> we'll be able to do just this. Until then, the problem's
Mike> not really as bad as you make i
It seems Vallo Kallaste wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 12:57:04PM -0800, Doug White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
> > > I'm getting the "lost disk contact" messages every now and then, but
> > > only on our mp3 machine with PIIX3 controller and IBM UDMA/66 disk. It's
> > > an PPro machine with
Leif Neland wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
> > (3) A big notice in UPDATING, saying that ata is the replacement for
> >wd. Make wd require "options I_WANT_WD" or something similar,
> >so that people can't simply re-config their existing configuration
On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> Doug Rabson wrote:
> >
> > > The recent commits made existing support even worse. Yes, I'm talking
> > > about the ESS1888. It's more dead than before. I'll have to make the
> > > noise myself these days, and I can tell you it's no opera :-)
> > >
>
On Sun, 12 Dec 1999, Nik Clayton wrote:
> (3) A big notice in UPDATING, saying that ata is the replacement for
>wd. Make wd require "options I_WANT_WD" or something similar,
>so that people can't simply re-config their existing configuration
>file.
>
To be nasty: Ch
Doug Rabson wrote:
>
> > The recent commits made existing support even worse. Yes, I'm talking
> > about the ESS1888. It's more dead than before. I'll have to make the
> > noise myself these days, and I can tell you it's no opera :-)
> >
> > In short: Gimme patches! I'll be happy to test and, in
On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 11:59:38AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >Poul, I'd like to know what's wrong with
> >
> > (1) Putting ata in GENERIC
> >
> > (2) Keeping wd in LINT, commented out
>
> This will not force CURRENT users to change their configs, a config
> with wd in it will still wo
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> "Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
>
> > Actually, I'm sad to say that our shiny new sound system does *not*
> > work for some of the most popular audio chipsets on the market today
> > (where the older "luigi" sound system did support them) and this is a
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nik Clayton writ
es:
>On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 07:01:49PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> The ata driver has been available for you and other to test for a long
>> time.
>
>That may be the case, but the vast majority of our users don't run
>-current, for good re
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 12:57:04PM -0800, Doug White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm getting the "lost disk contact" messages every now and then, but
> > only on our mp3 machine with PIIX3 controller and IBM UDMA/66 disk. It's
> > an PPro machine with Intel mobo. Can it be related to newer IBM
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Wilko Bulte writes:
>On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 09:00:52AM -0800, Bob Vaughan wrote:
>> > Subject: Re: HEADSUP: wd driver will be retired!
>> > Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:19:43 +0100
>> > From: Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 07:01:49PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> The ata driver has been available for you and other to test for a long
> time.
That may be the case, but the vast majority of our users don't run
-current, for good reason, and so are in no position to test it. 4.0
will be t
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kenneth Wayne Culver
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just a question which I'm not sure is soundcard related. My xmms no longer
> starts up anymore, it just hangs in Poll before it actually puts anything
> on the display, is that because /dev/dsp isn't working?
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike Smith writes:
: This is the usual poorly thought out argument, which fails to note that
: when you lose a disk you're already screwed due by /etc/fstab and the
: need to hard-mount local filesystems.
No. You aren't screwed. I have a system that needs /, /va
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "David O'Brien" writes:
: 2. Fix PCCARD on my laptop so I can suspend
What's the current issue? I have 0 problems suspending/resuming. I'd
like to know what is still broken, if anything, with the latest
-current.
: OR, I can work on the compiler and close my ope
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "David O'Brien" writes:
: On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 09:22:55PM -0700, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
: > And as for the device renaming, you didn't have to change anything from
: > sd->da. The old device names and nodes were supported in most every way.
:
: BUT not any long
> > "Dieter" == Dieter Rothacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>writes:
>
> Dieter> Why would you want to define "correct" numbering the
> Dieter> non-spread-out numbering? Or did I misunderstand you? I
> Dieter> have all my disks as master drives on the channels. Now,
> Dieter> when
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> Or worse, on a file server where you lose a low-numbered disk, not
> only does that one go away, but everything higher numbered loses as
> well. This "feature" does nothing other than introduce a gratuitous
Amen to this. If the default kernel or
> I think this should only apply to the /dev/wd* compatability devices. ie:
> use the correct numbering for new installs onto ad*, but still support the old
> spread-out naming for wd*. This used to be more important as it required
> fiddling with $root_disk_unit, but the new mountroot code has
Here is a patch for my modem:
--- sio.c.orig Sat Dec 11 19:51:29 1999
+++ sio.c Sat Dec 11 19:51:20 1999
@@ -553,6 +553,7 @@
{0x31307256, NULL}, /* USR3031 */
{0x8020b04e, NULL}, /* SUP2080 */
{0x8024b04e, NULL
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 02:48:12PM -0700, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > "Dieter" == Dieter Rothacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>writes:
>
> Dieter> Why would you want to define "correct" numbering the
> Dieter> non-spread-out numbering? Or did I misunderstand you? I
> Dieter> have all m
phk wrote:
> This is *CURRENT* remember ? We want this transistion done and
> tested before current becomes 4.0-RELEASE. The time is NOW!
Not quite: this is -current, 4 days before a functionality freeze and
potentially less than one month before 4.0-RELEASE. Replacing critical
parts of the s
...
>
> The scsi system has always been dynamic with a wiring *option* right from
> as far back as 2.0. CAM didn't change this.
as far back as 386BSD and the patchkit.
--
Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wi
Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > "Adam" == Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Adam> As I understand it, cam or pre-cam or wd or ata it is simply
> Adam> an issue of defaults. If you plan to use disks that die or
> Adam> become removed, simply read LINT on how to wire your disk
>
> "Adam" == Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adam> As I understand it, cam or pre-cam or wd or ata it is simply
Adam> an issue of defaults. If you plan to use disks that die or
Adam> become removed, simply read LINT on how to wire your disk
Adam> id's.
I understand. The poi
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 05:15:29PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> Please, help Sos fix ATA if you know of a problem.
> Please, help fix PCCARD if you know of a problem.
Ok, so now the attitude is I need to spend all my time:
1. Fix ATA to work on my laptop (there are timeout issues)
2. F
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
>> "Dieter" == Dieter Rothacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Dieter> Why would you want to define "correct" numbering the
>Dieter> non-spread-out numbering? Or did I misunderstand you? I
>Dieter> have all my disks as master drives on
> "Dieter" == Dieter Rothacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dieter> Why would you want to define "correct" numbering the
Dieter> non-spread-out numbering? Or did I misunderstand you? I
Dieter> have all my disks as master drives on the channels. Now,
Dieter> when I hook up anot
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
> > > The same thing is about to apply to the woxware sound code, we have a
> > > new shiny system that works and is much better designed...
> >
> > Actually, I'm sad to say that our shiny new sound system does *not*
> > work for some of the most popular audio chipsets
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 09:22:55PM -0700, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> And as for the device renaming, you didn't have to change anything from
> sd->da. The old device names and nodes were supported in most every way.
BUT not any longer. Thus we have no choice but fully make the sd->da
change. [D
Just a question which I'm not sure is soundcard related. My xmms no longer
starts up anymore, it just hangs in Poll before it actually puts anything
on the display, is that because /dev/dsp isn't working?
=
| Kenneth Culver
> > The same thing is about to apply to the woxware sound code, we have a
> > new shiny system that works and is much better designed...
>
> Actually, I'm sad to say that our shiny new sound system does *not*
> work for some of the most popular audio chipsets on the market today
> (where the olde
On 11-Dec-99 Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
>>: You overlook one simple thing here: If we want the ata driver tested,
>>: we need to make existing kernel configs break, otherwise people
>>:
On Sat, Dec 11, 1999 at 09:00:52AM -0800, Bob Vaughan wrote:
> > Subject: Re: HEADSUP: wd driver will be retired!
> > Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:19:43 +0100
> > From: Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> > Maybe we should put a special marke
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 11:20:19PM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> my strategy on the whole affair at this point has
> been to simply make marks on a tally-sheet near my keyboard,
While there is now working support for SiS 5591, and
thus my initial objection to removal of the wd drivers is now
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 11:28:20AM +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> It seems Soren Schmidt wrote:
> > It seems Richard Seaman, Jr. wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 03:02:37PM +0100, Soren Schmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > > OK, you asked for it, following is a patch to support the
> > > > sis 5591 chi
> Subject: Re: HEADSUP: wd driver will be retired!
> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 19:19:43 +0100
> From: Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> Maybe we should put a special marker in -currents sendmail and
> reject all email to the current list if they don'
>>> If half as much energy was spent adding the missing bits of
>>> functionality to the new systems as people have been spending
>>> complaining it then we'd be there ages ago.
>>
>> Not true. It doesn't take a disk expert to complain about a policy,
>> but it takes one to fix bugs/add features
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 09:31:57PM +0100, Soren Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've connected the disk back to the UDM33 controller and it works
> > fine. Now I get the message twice a day:
> >
> > ata0-master: ad_timeout: lost disk contact - resetting
> > ata0: resetting devices .. done
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stephen McKay writes
:
>On Friday, 10th December 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
>
>>The same mentality that made the CAM cutover a "debacle" is making the
>>ata cutover a "debacle".
First of all, "core" is not really involved in this per se.
>It might be that these th
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
> Actually, I'm sad to say that our shiny new sound system does *not*
> work for some of the most popular audio chipsets on the market today
> (where the older "luigi" sound system did support them) and this is a
> matter of significant concern to some folks, myself inc
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 18:28:42 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
>Dieter Rothacker wrote:
>>
>> You should use the kernel option
>> "options ATA_STATIC_ID"
>> for such cases. At least it works for me :-)
>
>I think this should only apply to the /dev/wd* compatability devices. ie:
>use the correct numb
Dieter Rothacker wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 14:21:25 +0800 (WST), Michael Kennett wrote:
>
> >Note that wd1 is not present. This caused a mild hickup when rebooting the
> >new kernel, since the new ata controller assigned the labels ad0 and ad1 to
> >the drives. It was not possible to boot in
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 14:21:25 +0800 (WST), Michael Kennett wrote:
>Note that wd1 is not present. This caused a mild hickup when rebooting the
>new kernel, since the new ata controller assigned the labels ad0 and ad1 to
>the drives. It was not possible to boot into multiuser mode without changing
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" writes:
>> The ATA driver went golden now, and to make sure nobody is distracted
>> from testing it before 4.0-RELEASE is cut, the wd driver will be
>> removed.
>>
>> It's really that simple.
>
>Well, I'm not sure that's really true yet and I wo
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Kennett writes:
>Finally, I've noticed the following messages:
>
>Dec 11 13:54:50 rabbit /kernel: ad1: UDMA CRC READ ERROR blk# 0 retrying
>Dec 11 13:54:50 rabbit last message repeated 2 times
>Dec 11 13:54:50 rabbit /kernel: ad1: UDMA CRC READ ERROR blk# 0
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
>: You overlook one simple thing here: If we want the ata driver tested,
>: we need to make existing kernel configs break, otherwise people
>: will not change them to use ata. We know th
> Except that ATA currently does not work on my system. So I assume I'm not
> the only one.
Actually, to quote from your original message:
] According to technical product summary, the primary IDE interface, on
] which both my drives reside, is a PCTech RZ1000 on the PCI local bus.
Nobody in
> The ATA driver went golden now, and to make sure nobody is distracted
> from testing it before 4.0-RELEASE is cut, the wd driver will be
> removed.
>
> It's really that simple.
Well, I'm not sure that's really true yet and I would honestly prefer
it if you wouldn't make "conclusive statements"
FWIW, here are my experiences with the new ATA driver. Firstly, I've been
following the discussion on -current, and decided that this weekend I'd
convert over to the new ata drivers - but with a bit of trepidation, given
the discussion that's been going on. Anyway, I've rebuild my kernel, reboote
Mike Smith wrote...
> > And as for the device renaming, you didn't have to change anything from
> > sd->da. The old device names and nodes were supported in most every way.
> > There were a lot of mis-informed people on the lists who claimed that you
> > had to change your device names. That was
> Look at the sound code to see why your proposal doesn't work in our
> reality.
Again, bad example. The sound card may very well turn out to be
an area where we fucked up; it's far too early to say yet.
- Jordan
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current
You better watch it Jordan , you are starting to sound like a multimedia
guy 8)
--
Amancio Hasty
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> The same thing is about to apply to the woxware sound code, we have a
> new shiny system that works and is much better designed...
Actually, I'm sad to say that our shiny new sound system does *not*
work for some of the most popular audio chipsets on the market today
(where the older "luigi" so
> On Friday, 10th December 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> >The same mentality that made the CAM cutover a "debacle" is making the
> >ata cutover a "debacle".
>
> This "mentality" might be an unavoidable part of human nature. I found
That was my musing in the next paragraph.
> my first reactio
> And as for the device renaming, you didn't have to change anything from
> sd->da. The old device names and nodes were supported in most every way.
> There were a lot of mis-informed people on the lists who claimed that you
> had to change your device names. That was completely untrue, and I
>
On Friday, 10th December 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
>The same mentality that made the CAM cutover a "debacle" is making the
>ata cutover a "debacle".
This "mentality" might be an unavoidable part of human nature. I found
my first reaction was "How dare they take away something I have now?!"
and
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> And as for the device renaming, you didn't have to change anything from
> sd->da. The old device names and nodes were supported in most every way.
> There were a lot of mis-informed people on the lists who claimed that you
> had to change your devi
Stephen McKay wrote...
> On Friday, 10th December 1999, "Kenneth D. Merry" wrote:
> >Brad Knowles wrote...
> >> At 3:05 PM -0700 1999/12/10, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> >>
> >> > I agree that the CAM integration shouldn't be used as a precedent here.
> >> > I don't agree with your characterizatio
>
> We've been telling people for a long time that the wd driver would
> remain around even after ata went golden to support the ESDI systems
> still in service. That sounds like it is changing now.
Real support for ESDI died with bad144... Error free ESDI disks are
very rare, even the best in
On Friday, 10th December 1999, "Kenneth D. Merry" wrote:
>Brad Knowles wrote...
>> At 3:05 PM -0700 1999/12/10, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
>>
>> > I agree that the CAM integration shouldn't be used as a precedent here.
>> > I don't agree with your characterization of it as a "debacle", though.
>>
> At 10:32 PM +0100 1999/12/10, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> > Well, the only precedent we have is CAM/SCSI, and it was done the
> > same way.
>
> Given some of the things I've heard about the CAM/SCSI debacle,
> I'm not sure that this is a good example to be trotting out right
> now.
> > If half as much energy was spent adding the missing bits of functionality
> > to the new systems as people have been spending complaining it then we'd be
> > there ages ago.
>
> Not true. It doesn't take a disk expert to complain about a policy, but
> it takes one to fix bugs/add features to
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
: You overlook one simple thing here: If we want the ata driver tested,
: we need to make existing kernel configs break, otherwise people
: will not change them to use ata. We know this from bitter experience.
If all you are talking about
Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Once we have established that the new driver doesn't leave a large
> number of people stranded it will be killed for good.
I think this is a key issue, if not *THE* key issue.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but PHK and others are basical
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kris Ken
naway writes:
>No-one (as far as I can see) is objecting to making ata the default (which
>it already is), and to kill wd in some number of weeks. Why can't you just
>do that, and put and end to this discussion happily? Will a few weeks
>really harm the de
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> This fails the most important criteria for the transistion to ATA:
> it doesn't break existing kernel configs.
>
> Listen guys, this is a tempest in a tea-cup, we are not loosing any
> functionality here, we are gaining functionality.
>
> The
Brad Knowles wrote...
> At 3:05 PM -0700 1999/12/10, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
>
> > I agree that the CAM integration shouldn't be used as a precedent here. I
> > don't agree with your characterization of it as a "debacle", though.
> >
> > On the whole, we gained a whole lot and lost very littl
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> Listen guys, this is a tempest in a tea-cup, we are not loosing any
> functionality here, we are gaining functionality.
Poul-Henning, what I'm seeing here is a LOT of voices raised against this
idea, both from key developers and other citizens of -
At 11:22 PM 12/10/99 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >This discussion is not going anywhere. Why can't everyone calm down and
> >find a comprise? Here's my proposal:
> >
> >1. leave the the code and config option in the source tree for now
> >2. remove all traces of wd in documentation/GENERIC/L
At 3:05 PM -0700 1999/12/10, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> I agree that the CAM integration shouldn't be used as a precedent here. I
> don't agree with your characterization of it as a "debacle", though.
>
> On the whole, we gained a whole lot and lost very little.
Long-term, yes I belie
This discussion is not going anywhere. Why can't everyone calm down and
find a comprise? Here's my proposal:
1. leave the the code and config option in the source tree for now
2. remove all traces of wd in documentation/GENERIC/LINT/MAKEDEV
that is, anyone who wants to use the wd driver still ca
I think there has been enough objections to the idea of just removing wd.c
for it to stay for a few months.
It doesn't hurt to keep it. Especially if it's not on by default.
I think this argument can go away for a while.
On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROT
--
From: "Luoqi Chen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: HEADSUP: wd driver will be retired!
> This discussion is not going anywhere. Why can't everyone calm down and
> find a comprise? Here's my pr
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Luoqi Chen writes:
>This discussion is not going anywhere. Why can't everyone calm down and
>find a comprise? Here's my proposal:
>
>1. leave the the code and config option in the source tree for now
>2. remove all traces of wd in documentation/GENERIC/LINT/MAKEDEV
Brad Knowles wrote...
> At 10:32 PM +0100 1999/12/10, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> > Well, the only precedent we have is CAM/SCSI, and it was done the
> > same way.
>
> Given some of the things I've heard about the CAM/SCSI debacle,
> I'm not sure that this is a good example to be trott
1 - 100 of 224 matches
Mail list logo
