On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 12:15:08AM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Kurt Garloff wrote:
>
> > Actually, 2.0e3 did include one rather important fix which solved the
>
> Uh. Fix? This sounds like working around very broken devices to me, or
> are devices allowed to wreak havoc if sync negotiation is tried in spite
> of not being advertised in inquiry data?
Well, at least for devices that do not claim SCSI-2 compliance (but 1 or
1-CCS), it may not be that bad.
> > I'll happily sent a patch against 2.4.0t9 and/or 2.2.18p15 to
> > Linus/Alan to get an updated version included in the mainstream
> > kernel.
>
> Sounds good.
I'd prefered getting some feedback by them.
Maybe, I should try just sending the patches out to them ...
Regards,
--
Kurt Garloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [Eindhoven, NL]
Physics: Plasma simulations <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [TU Eindhoven, NL]
Linux: SCSI, Security <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [SuSE Nuernberg, FRG]
(See mail header or public key servers for PGP2 and GPG public keys.)
PGP signature
