Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:54:01 -0600 (MDT)
From:      "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@plutotech.com>
To:        jonny@jonny.eng.br (Joao Carlos Mendes Luis)
Cc:        ken@plutotech.com, ckempf@enigami.com, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Rolling CAM in, what is still needed?
Message-ID:  <199806190354.VAA10250@panzer.plutotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <199806190002.VAA15043@roma.coe.ufrj.br> from Joao Carlos Mendes Luis at "Jun 18, 98 09:02:45 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joao Carlos Mendes Luis wrote...
> #define quoting(Kenneth D. Merry)
> // 	One other area that could use some work/help is userland
> // application porting.  So far, we have:
> 
> Isn't it possible to do a compatibility layer in CAM ?  Changes in
> API are always a PITA.

	Yeah, in fact I even had a SCIOCCOMMAND implementation for the
passthrough driver early on.  I would much rather, however, move
applications over to the new API.  It isn't that hard to use.

	I know that changes in API can be a PITA, I had to port a very
large application from the old scsireq/SCIOCCOMMAND system to the new
passthrough driver.  We can't keep old API's around forever for no
particular reason, so I'd rather go ahead and port things.

	In any case, most of the major consumers of the old SCSI
passthrough facilities have been ported.  cdd and SANE have not, but my
guess is that there aren't many more than that.

Ken
-- 
Kenneth Merry
ken@plutotech.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806190354.VAA10250>