From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 19 21:48:43 2005 Return-Path: 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 09CD016A4CF for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:48:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8149643D53 for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:48:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) j2JLmgb18440; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:48:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Charles Swiger" , "Theo de Raadt" Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 13:48:31 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal cc: Sean Hafeez cc: Scott Long cc: misc@openbsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Adaptec AAC raid support X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:48:43 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Charles Swiger > Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 1:30 PM > To: Theo de Raadt > Cc: misc@openbsd.org; Scott Long; Sean Hafeez; > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Adaptec AAC raid support > > > Scott is or was under NDA with Adaptec. Scott certainly is not in a > position to give away all of Adaptec's internal documentation. > Frankly, I doubt even the CEO of Adaptec would be free to simply give > away all of their internal docs-- Adaptec undoubtedly has NDA > obligations with their partners, chip suppliers, and so forth, which > constrains what they can make public. > This is bullcrap. Adaptec is quite obviously the single largest customer of any of those chip partners. If they told those partners they wern't going to sign an NDA those partners would say "How high do you want me to jump, sir" > But the hardware vendors aren't obligated to meet your demands, This is also bullcrap. The hardware vendors are obligated to support THEIR customers who have bought product from them. Some of those customers want to run OpenBSD. Therefore the hardware vendors are obligated to get off their fat asses and work with the OpenBSD people regardless of how they may personally like or dislike them. Ted