From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 5 21:13:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB2016A420 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 2006 21:13:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from duane@greenmeadow.ca) Received: from smtpout.eastlink.ca (smtpout.eastlink.ca [24.222.0.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB0043D46 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 2006 21:13:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from duane@greenmeadow.ca) Received: from ip03.eastlink.ca ([24.222.10.15]) by mta01.eastlink.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.03 (built Sep 22 2005)) with ESMTP id <0IVO00L59AZDCIW0@mta01.eastlink.ca> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:14:01 -0400 (AST) Received: from blk-224-199-230.eastlink.ca (HELO [192.168.0.103]) ([24.224.199.230]) by ip03.eastlink.ca with ESMTP; Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:13:36 -0400 Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:12:36 -0400 From: Duane Whitty In-reply-to: <20060304213050.GA57225@xor.obsecurity.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-id: <200603051712.36483.duane@greenmeadow.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-BrightmailFiltered: true X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAA+k= References: <200603041726.37525.duane@greenmeadow.ca> <20060304213050.GA57225@xor.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 21:13:38 -0000 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