Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-03-01 Thread Max Khon
hi, there! On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 09:58:00PM +0100, Søren Schmidt wrote: Hmm, why do we need to add new layers and loss of functionality to the ATAPI devices ? Many many many people would like to be able to use cdrecord to burn data to cd's so that all the front-ends to cdrecord

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-03-01 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Max Khon wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 09:58:00PM +0100, S?ren Schmidt wrote: Hmm, why do we need to add new layers and loss of functionality to the ATAPI devices ? Many many many people would like to be able to use cdrecord to burn data to cd's so that all the

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-03-01 Thread Ollivier Robert
According to Thomas Quinot: is one known pending issue with this code: on *some* machines, patched kernels hang at boot time, immediately after registering Thomas knows it already but I'd to mention that one of these machines is a dual PIII/800 running 4.4-STABLE/SMP. I haven't tried the patch

Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Thomas Quinot
An updated version of the ATAPI/CAM patches is available from http://www.cuivre.fr.eu.org/~thomas/atapicam/ This version contains no functional changes, but synchronize with recent modifications to the generic ATAPI code. As always, I would be interested in any feedback. Specifically, there is

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Julian Elischer
This is definitly something that is needed.. The question is whether the CAM and ATAPI authors feel it is right. We are guided by them (even though we desperatly need this). Personally even if not perfect.. it's better than nothing and we should probably commit something like it. or based on

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Kenneth D. Merry
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:49:18 -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: This is definitly something that is needed.. The question is whether the CAM and ATAPI authors feel it is right. We are guided by them (even though we desperatly need this). Personally even if not perfect.. it's better than

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Kenneth D. Merry wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:49:18 -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: This is definitly something that is needed.. The question is whether the CAM and ATAPI authors feel it is right. We are guided by them (even though we desperatly need this). Personally

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Julian Elischer
I think it's better to commit it now and have it fixed in situ. It's new functionality so committing it with bugs will not break anyone. it will however get more work done on it and more testing. On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:49:18 -0800, Julian

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Matthew N. Dodd
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote: I'll quit the ATA/ATAPI development/maintenance if this goes in quickly. What? Are you looking at the same patches that everyone else is? I'd expect this sort of foot-dragging if the patch were intrusive to the ATA drivers but its not. -- | Matthew

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jul ian Elischer writes: I think it's better to commit it now and have it fixed in situ. It's new functionality so committing it with bugs will not break anyone. it will however get more work done on it and more testing. [...] Well you are one of the main CAM

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Matthew N. Dodd wrote: On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote: I'll quit the ATA/ATAPI development/maintenance if this goes in quickly. What? Are you looking at the same patches that everyone else is? Read the rest of my mail, the problem is not the patches as much as it is all the

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Christopher Nielsen
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 02:45:04PM -0500, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote: I'll quit the ATA/ATAPI development/maintenance if this goes in quickly. What? Are you looking at the same patches that everyone else is? I'd expect this sort of foot-dragging if

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
Hmm, why do we need to add new layers and loss of functionality to the ATAPI devices ? Many many many people would like to be able to use cdrecord to burn data to cd's so that all the front-ends to cdrecord will work. It's much nicer than memorizing mkisofs commandline switches :-) What

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Julian Elischer
Poul-henning. What crack are you on? Have you looked at the patches in question? They are small and non-intrusive. We are relying on the ATA maintainer to tell us whether they are dangerous, but they are so small that we should look at fast-tracking them if possible. Even if it was broken,

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Julian Elischer
where dod sis post his email..? I never saw it On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Kenneth Culver wrote: Hmm, why do we need to add new layers and loss of functionality to the ATAPI devices ? Many many many people would like to be able to use cdrecord to burn data to cd's so that all the

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Scott Long
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 12:57, Sxren Schmidt wrote: It seems Matthew N. Dodd wrote: On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote: I'll quit the ATA/ATAPI development/maintenance if this goes in quickly. What? Are you looking at the same patches that everyone else is? Read the rest of my

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Kenneth Culver wrote: Hmm, why do we need to add new layers and loss of functionality to the ATAPI devices ? Many many many people would like to be able to use cdrecord to burn data to cd's so that all the front-ends to cdrecord will work. It's much nicer than memorizing mkisofs

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Scott Long wrote: As I have stated several times, I have no problem with ATAPI being sent through CAM as long as the usual way stays (some of us cannot afford the weight of those extra layers, nor loose functionality). I'd do the integration somewhat differently to even further

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Scott Long
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 14:06, Søren Schmidt wrote: It seems Scott Long wrote: As I have stated several times, I have no problem with ATAPI being sent through CAM as long as the usual way stays (some of us cannot afford the weight of those extra layers, nor loose functionality). I'd do

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Justin T. Gibbs
What functionality is lost by this ability? Compare the features of the ATAPI vs SCSI CD drivers.. This is exactly why I'd like to see this code merged. The hardware changes too rapidly. The specs change too rapidly but MMC is MMC. More of us are getting wives we need to take out to dinner

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Justin T. Gibbs wrote: What functionality is lost by this ability? Compare the features of the ATAPI vs SCSI CD drivers.. This is exactly why I'd like to see this code merged. The hardware changes too rapidly. The specs change too rapidly but MMC is MMC. Exactly. More of us

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Søren Schmidt
It seems Scott Long wrote: I'm mainly raising my hand to take the abuse that will no doubt happen once in a while. Sure, maybe we should make Thomas a committer so he could look after it himself ? Interested ? Got the time ? I'm all ears for volounteers... Ummm, I'm

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Thomas Quinot
Wow /that's/ a thread ;) On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Søren Schmidt wrote: I'll quit the ATA/ATAPI development/maintenance if this goes in quickly. First of all I'd like to make two points: * Søren is doing a great job as ATA maintainer, and it would be a Bad Thing to have him quit; * I am

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Thomas Quinot
Le 2002-02-28, Søren Schmidt écrivait : I have no problem with you doing it, I was just fishing for getting Thomas into the net also, we need all the hands we can get :) As I mentioned I am entirely willing to take charge of the care and feeding of the bugs I wrote. Thomas. -- [EMAIL

RE: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Jan Stocker
I think Thomas is doing here a quite good job and it is also to him to decide to include his sources and maybe maintain them. The ata sources have changed a lot the last weeks, so until Thomas thinks his sources are under heavy development too, both should do their jobs and we've some patches

RE: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Julian Elischer
We have CVS Why not commit the prototype now and update it as people get the corner cases worked out? The code doesn't interfere with either the CAM system or the ATAPI system that I can see. On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Jan Stocker wrote: I think Thomas is doing here a quite good job and it is also

RE: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Jan Stocker
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 23:15, Julian Elischer wrote: We have CVS Okay.. thats a piece software.. Why not commit the prototype now and update it as people get the corner cases worked out? If Thomas can and will maintain it, ok... else read my comment from my last mail... The code doesn't

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
Umm, I don't remember where he posted it, but it wasn't posted privately. Most likely since I'm using pine, it was posted to freebsd-current and freebsd-scsi. Ken On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: where dod sis post his email..? I never saw it On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Kenneth

Re: Updated ATAPI/CAM patches

2002-02-28 Thread Kenneth Culver
Hmm, cdrecord can be used with the ATAPI sunsystem as it is, I did patches for this long ago, but noone picked it up as a port... I remember you saying that you had these, but you weren't willing to release them for some reason; something to do with the GPL... What functionality is lost by