From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Apr 4 23:22:51 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id XAA04504 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 23:22:51 -0700 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id XAA04498 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 23:22:50 -0700 Received: (from phk@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id XAA06938; Tue, 4 Apr 1995 23:22:44 -0700 From: Poul-Henning Kamp Message-Id: <199504050622.XAA06938@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: Colorado Jumbo 250MB ft, and FreeBSD 2.0R To: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com (Rodney W. Grimes) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 23:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Cc: steve2@freefall.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <199504050515.WAA09768@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> from "Rodney W. Grimes" at Apr 4, 95 10:15:50 pm Content-Type: text Content-Length: 568 Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Is this really the right thing to do? Somehow I have the feeling that > 1 second is plenty of time for a seek operation to complete for any > given floppy drive and the real bug is in the DELAY code. Hum, some of these commands require quite a number of "steps" to be taken, 50 or so I belive. What if this particular machine initializes the step rate to something slow like 20ms ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp -- TRW Financial Systems, Inc. 'All relevant people are pertinent' && 'All rude people are impertinent' => 'no rude people are relevant'