Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:09:12 +0200 (CEST) From: "Remko Lodder" <remko@elvandar.org> To: "David Southwell" <david@vizion2000.net> Cc: usb@freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org, scottl@FreeBSD.org, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: kern/114667: [umass] UMASS device error log problem Message-ID: <57428.194.74.82.3.1186643352.squirrel@galain.elvandar.org> In-Reply-To: <200708090016.07548.david@vizion2000.net> References: <200708081620.l78GK69W018680@freefall.freebsd.org> <200708081502.14940.david@vizion2000.net> <20070808.161706.635731737.imp@bsdimp.com> <200708090016.07548.david@vizion2000.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, August 9, 2007 9:16 am, David Southwell wrote:
>> Warner
>
> That is precisely why I have put in a PR. CAM is pretty ancient and IMHO
> it is
> time it was revisited to get rid of this tiresome behaviour. Unfortunatley
> I
> do not have the capability to do it myself. In this case "hacking the
> source"
> iand "bug fixing" are synonyms.
>
> It needs fixing - and therefore a PR is IMHO most appropriate.
>
> David
>
With all due respect, I think this is -your- opinion, which you are
entitled to ofcourse. Others might not be as convinced that this should be
revised as you are. The PR database is for getting reports about problems,
but as shown in this discussion, the PRoblem here is still under
discussion. Especially since nobody replied to this, it gives me the
feeling that this is just someone a few people want.
I included Scott Long in the discussion who has more clue about CAM that I
do ;-): Scott, what do you think about the proposal? ("CAM should be less
verbose when you issue a camcontrol devlist for example").
thanks,
remko
--
Kind regards,
Remko Lodder ** remko@elvandar.org
FreeBSD ** remko@FreeBSD.org
/* Quis custodiet ipsos custodes */
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?57428.194.74.82.3.1186643352.squirrel>