From owner-freebsd-hardware Tue May 19 07:43:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA28062 for freebsd-hardware-outgoing; Tue, 19 May 1998 07:43:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sos.freebsd.dk (sos.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.180] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA28035; Tue, 19 May 1998 07:43:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sos@sos.freebsd.dk) Received: (from sos@localhost) by sos.freebsd.dk (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA02539; Tue, 19 May 1998 16:43:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sos) Message-Id: <199805191443.QAA02539@sos.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: 12.0 GB Quantum Bigfoot TX IDE seen as 8.4 GB In-Reply-To: from Julian at "May 19, 98 03:21:48 pm" To: julian@ivision.co.uk (Julian) Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 16:43:06 +0200 (CEST) Cc: sos@FreeBSD.ORG, hans@artcom.de, julian@ivision.co.uk, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG From: Søren Schmidt Reply-to: sos@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In reply to Julian who wrote: > > > > Erhm, this is not in the 2.2-stable charter folks, the patches that > > should go into 2.2-stable should only be bugfixes etc, the next thing > > is that somebody wants the SMP code into 2.2-stable... > > There has to be a line drawn somewhere.... > > Err, it isn't worth arguing the point, but this _is_ a bug as far as I > am concerned. I can't specify the CHS setup I need to use this drive, > I get errors with this drive attatched. I cannot format the drive > correctly, I cannot use the drive correctly. Why not? Because LBA > is broken on 2.2. I'd call that a bug. No its not broken, there simply is NO LBA support in -stable.... > I appreciate, and approve of FreeBSD's attitude to implementing things > slowly, and more cautiously as compared to Linux, but sometimes > you seem over cautious to me. If you want bleeding edge there is always -current :) And I repeat, there are no plans to incorporate DMA support into -stable. > I now have a Hans Huebner's patch, and will be applying this sometime > soon, so to an extent I am not fussed. I just don't entirely agree with > where the line has been drawn in this case. I havn't seen the patch, but if its a port of my first attempts in -current it breaks dump severely. Besides there is no need to use LBA mode to use the big drives, and this has been fixed in -current. I'm sure alot of people has other things they'd like to see backported to -stable, but thats the way life is. We simply doesn't have the manpower to do all the work that involves, and we will not risk the stability of -stable by doing any hasty hacks. -stable is targetted as the stable branch of FreeBSD for "end users", -current is the bleeding edge where new development is hashed out by the developers. Thats the way it is, and thats the way it has to stay.. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Søren Schmidt (sos@FreeBSD.org) FreeBSD Core Team Even more code to hack -- will it ever end .. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message