From owner-freebsd-bugs Mon Jun 26 9:40: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 199AE37B6BB for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:40:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id JAA68428; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:40:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:40:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006261640.JAA68428@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Doug Barton Subject: Re: kern/5789: wcd0 requires ATAPI_STATIC Reply-To: Doug Barton Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR kern/5789; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Doug Barton To: nbm@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/5789: wcd0 requires ATAPI_STATIC Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 09:30:38 -0700 nbm@FreeBSD.org wrote: > Did the atapi module ever work? Not for me it didn't. > 4.x and beyond implies ATAPI_STATIC. > Unfortunately 3.5 ws just rolled: should I close this then? Yeah, might as well. You'll pardon me though if I can't help finding it a little sad that in 2.3 years no one can be bothered to update the comments in GENERIC and LINT. The problems is effectively dealt with in 4.x+, so there's no point in keeping this open. Thanks for the followup, Doug To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message