Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:56:11 -0500 From: Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Cc: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: atausb perspectives Message-ID: <20091123195611.150549a0@kan.dnsalias.net> In-Reply-To: <4B0B159B.9040305@FreeBSD.org> References: <4B0B159B.9040305@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_/VzI7EKpOBd+8Q+=_pke68rn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:07:07 +0200 Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > Hi. >=20 > At this moment we have two possible ways to support USB mass storages: > umass and atausb. First one handles USB mass storage devices as SCSI > ones by using CAM infrastructure. It is working and maintained. Second > one was made to do the same using ata(4), is reports devices as ATAPI > (in fact the same SCSI). But it is out of build since I can remember. >=20 > Looking on atausb state and ata(4) perspectives generally, I can't > find any reason for having atausb in the tree. What is the public > opinion, can we just drop it now? >=20 > --=20 > Alexander Motin I think the rule is simple and well known: if code rots and nobody steps up as a new maintainer, it gets booted out of the tree. Looks like atausb is firmly in that category. Unless someone raises a hand=20 My $0.02 --=20 Alexander Kabaev --Sig_/VzI7EKpOBd+8Q+=_pke68rn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFLCy8wQ6z1jMm+XZYRAgNRAJ4iQxhsQWCIoFuVWc3Ban8LzGdUigCbBrh5 k3h5emolxlRr/H84QR8eKRk= =9OmV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/VzI7EKpOBd+8Q+=_pke68rn--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091123195611.150549a0>