Re: no cd* devices appear in /dev [was Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE]
On Monday 06 March 2006 14:11, Duane Whitty wrote: > > On Monday March 6 2006 16:09 > > David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >wrote > > > > This reminds me to ask: I have > > ATAPICAM enable in my kernal, > > specifically so that k3b can find my > > dvd+rw ... but no cd* devives appear > > in /dev, and k3b cannot find anything > > no matter where I tell it to look .. > > I must be overlooking something, but > > what? > > Hi, > > look at man 4 atapicam. The examples > section lists the other devices you > need configured in the kernel. > > Hope this helps, > > --Duane Thanks. That and the 'make showinfo' in sysutils/k3b that I somehow missed the first trip 'round have it all working smoothly. -- Sure God created the world in only six days, but He didn't have an established userbase. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: no cd* devices appear in /dev [was Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE]
> On Monday March 6 2006 16:09 > David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote > > This reminds me to ask: I have > ATAPICAM enable in my kernal, > specifically so that k3b can find my > dvd+rw ... but no cd* devives appear > in /dev, and k3b cannot find anything > no matter where I tell it to look .. > I must be overlooking something, but > what? Hi, look at man 4 atapicam. The examples section lists the other devices you need configured in the kernel. Hope this helps, --Duane ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
On Sunday 05 March 2006 22:24, Duane Whitty wrote: > On Sunday 05 March 2006 17:31, Kris > > Kennaway wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:12:36PM > > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > > On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30, > > > Kris > > > > > > Kennaway wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at > > > > 05:26:37PM > > > > > > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Just wondering if anyone has > > > > > any information/opinion as to > > > > > why device atapicam is not > > > > > enabled by default in the > > > > > GENERIC kernel. > > > > > > > > It's not an appropriate default, > > > > since it modifies the way the ata > > > > subsystem works in ways the > > > > maintainer does not wish to > > > > support, > > > > > > Sorry, but do you mean the ata > > > subsystem maintainer or the > > > atapicam maintainer? > > > > The former. > > > > > Is atapicam part of the base? > > > > Yes. > > > > > I was > > > under the impression it implements > > > an abstracted SCSI interface over > > > the ata device subsystem but maybe > > > I'm not adequately understanding > > > what's really happening. > > > > As the name suggests, it provides a > > CAM front-end to the devices, which > > is the same front-end used by the > > SCSI devices, so tools that expect to > > use CAM can work on the ATA devices > > too. > > Ah, ok -- CAM -- common access method. > I'm getting this > > > > Just an observation but it seems as > > > though there is a great deal of use > > > being made of the atapicam > > > subsystem. I noticed for instance > > > that in addition to /dev/cd0 that > > > /dev/pass0 and /dev/da0 also did > > > not show up until I rebuilt with > > > atapicam or did I just miss them? > > > > The equivalent devices have different > > names under atapicam than ata, but > > why do you think they are necessary? > > because I misunderstood what umass > needed and I inappropriately > generalized on the basis of one port > (k3b) > > > > Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean > > > that usb drives and those types of > > > devices need the atapicam > > > subsystem? > > > > I suspect you're wrong. > > > > Kris > > Hi, > > Thanks Kris. Your suspicions were > correct. I was wrong. I re-read the > man pages for da, pass, and umass, and > nowhere did it say I needed atapicam. > So thanks for pointing me in the right > direction. > > I rebooted with the GENERIC kernel, > plugged in my usb memory device, and > everything worked great. > > The k3b port required this and I suppose > I generalized when I should not have. > > Again, much thanks. > > --Duane > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" This reminds me to ask: I have ATAPICAM enable in my kernal, specifically so that k3b can find my dvd+rw ... but no cd* devives appear in /dev, and k3b cannot find anything no matter where I tell it to look .. I must be overlooking something, but what? -- Sure God created the world in only six days, but He didn't have an established userbase. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
On Sunday 05 March 2006 17:31, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:12:36PM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30, > > Kris > > > > Kennaway wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at > > > 05:26:37PM > > > > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Just wondering if anyone has > > > > any information/opinion as to > > > > why device atapicam is not > > > > enabled by default in the > > > > GENERIC kernel. > > > > > > It's not an appropriate default, > > > since it modifies the way the ata > > > subsystem works in ways the > > > maintainer does not wish to > > > support, > > > > Sorry, but do you mean the ata > > subsystem maintainer or the > > atapicam maintainer? > > The former. > > > Is atapicam part of the base? > > Yes. > > > I was > > under the impression it implements > > an abstracted SCSI interface over > > the ata device subsystem but maybe > > I'm not adequately understanding > > what's really happening. > > As the name suggests, it provides a > CAM front-end to the devices, which > is the same front-end used by the > SCSI devices, so tools that expect to > use CAM can work on the ATA devices > too. > Ah, ok -- CAM -- common access method. I'm getting this > > Just an observation but it seems as > > though there is a great deal of use > > being made of the atapicam > > subsystem. I noticed for instance > > that in addition to /dev/cd0 that > > /dev/pass0 and /dev/da0 also did > > not show up until I rebuilt with > > atapicam or did I just miss them? > > The equivalent devices have different > names under atapicam than ata, but > why do you think they are necessary? > because I misunderstood what umass needed and I inappropriately generalized on the basis of one port (k3b) > > Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean > > that usb drives and those types of > > devices need the atapicam > > subsystem? > > I suspect you're wrong. > > Kris > Hi, Thanks Kris. Your suspicions were correct. I was wrong. I re-read the man pages for da, pass, and umass, and nowhere did it say I needed atapicam. So thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I rebooted with the GENERIC kernel, plugged in my usb memory device, and everything worked great. The k3b port required this and I suppose I generalized when I should not have. Again, much thanks. --Duane ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:12:36PM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30, Kris > Kennaway wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 05:26:37PM > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Just wondering if anyone has any > > > information/opinion as to why > > > device atapicam is not enabled by > > > default in the GENERIC kernel. > > > > It's not an appropriate default, > > since it modifies the way the ata > > subsystem works in ways the > > maintainer does not wish to support, > > Sorry, but do you mean the ata subsystem > maintainer or the atapicam maintainer? The former. > Is atapicam part of the base? Yes. > I was > under the impression it implements an > abstracted SCSI interface over the ata > device subsystem but maybe I'm not > adequately understanding what's really > happening. As the name suggests, it provides a CAM front-end to the devices, which is the same front-end used by the SCSI devices, so tools that expect to use CAM can work on the ATA devices too. > Just an observation but it seems as > though there is a great deal of use > being made of the atapicam subsystem. > I noticed for instance that in addition > to /dev/cd0 that /dev/pass0 > and /dev/da0 also did not show up until > I rebuilt with atapicam or did I just > miss them? The equivalent devices have different names under atapicam than ata, but why do you think they are necessary? > Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean that > usb drives and those types of devices > need the atapicam subsystem? I suspect you're wrong. Kris pgpZSkTkMS5Zd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 05:26:37PM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Just wondering if anyone has any > > information/opinion as to why > > device atapicam is not enabled by > > default in the GENERIC kernel. > > It's not an appropriate default, > since it modifies the way the ata > subsystem works in ways the > maintainer does not wish to support, Sorry, but do you mean the ata subsystem maintainer or the atapicam maintainer? > and often contains bugs. > > Kris Hi, Thanks Kris. Is atapicam part of the base? I was under the impression it implements an abstracted SCSI interface over the ata device subsystem but maybe I'm not adequately understanding what's really happening. Just an observation but it seems as though there is a great deal of use being made of the atapicam subsystem. I noticed for instance that in addition to /dev/cd0 that /dev/pass0 and /dev/da0 also did not show up until I rebuilt with atapicam or did I just miss them? Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean that usb drives and those types of devices need the atapicam subsystem? Thanks for your patience and help. Best regards, --Duane ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 05:26:37PM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > Hi, > > Just wondering if anyone has any > information/opinion as to why > device atapicam is not enabled by > default in the GENERIC kernel. It's not an appropriate default, since it modifies the way the ata subsystem works in ways the maintainer does not wish to support, and often contains bugs. Kris pgpKb3qUkLkmg.pgp Description: PGP signature
device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE
Hi, Just wondering if anyone has any information/opinion as to why device atapicam is not enabled by default in the GENERIC kernel. Does this apply to releases other than 6? Thanks in advance, --Duane ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
