In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Manuel Clos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the later seems cleaner. Now I just have one question about bloating the
> kernel,
> Is it so bloat if you only select "scsi support" and "scsi cd support"??
>
> If it is, then ide-cd and scsi-cdrom should share code, and allow the
> extensions
> that make my burner work be a module or a compile option.
No, that will make your ATAPI CD work as a reader only. You need the
sg module to do write. Now, for all the people who don't have SCSI
devices, you have support for reconnect, queued commands, multiple LUNs
per SCSI-id, etc. In other words to save typing a few lines in a config
file you want to increase the kernel size and complexity of the majority
of users who don't have it, don't need it, and don't want it.
The correct question is not why Linux doesn't do things Joerg's way,
but why distributions don't ask if an ATAPI device is a burner when they
find it at installation time. You are addressing the wrong problem and
thereby coming up with a non-optimal solution. The capabilities are all
there, only the installation is broken.
--
-bill davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
last possible moment - but no longer" -me
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
