From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue May 19 05:41:08 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA02852 for freebsd-hardware-outgoing; Tue, 19 May 1998 05:41:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.artcom.de ([192.76.129.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA02822 for ; Tue, 19 May 1998 05:40:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hans@artcom.de) Received: by mail.artcom.de id m0yblhM-00023bC; Tue, 19 May 1998 14:40:52 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:40:52 +0200 (CEST) From: hans@artcom.de (Hans Huebner) To: julian@ivision.co.uk Subject: Re: 12.0 GB Quantum Bigfoot TX IDE seen as 8.4 GB Newsgroups: artcom.mailing-list.freebsd.hardware In-Reply-To: Organization: Art+Com GmbH, Berlin, Germany Cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org And again: Julian writes: >> I have committed LBA support to -current about a month ago, and a fix for >> "normal" CHS mode went in last monday. >[...] >What am I going to need to do in order to get to use the drive? I >really would rather use it on a -STABLE system even if I then apply >a patch to that (potentially rendering it less stable) I'm beginning to get sick of this. I did port the the LBA code from -current to -stable, it works for me since weeks, and it works for several other people. I see no reason to not put that into -stable, and I'd really like to see that. 2.2.6-RELEASE is what people new to FreeBSD are installing, and it should support current hardware, if feasible. Supporting large IDE drives is feasible, so why not commit it? I opened a bug report with a patch on this. Please, someone commit it. -Hans To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message