From owner-freebsd-scsi Sat Dec 4 11:43:40 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A5814F71; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:43:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA10561; Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:43:39 -0800 Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:43:39 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Wilko Bulte Cc: gallatin@cs.duke.edu, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ISP firmware compiled in as a default.... In-Reply-To: <199911251900.UAA01014@yedi.iaf.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm now wondering whether or not this would be a good idea or not. Right now, the default is *not* to compile in the firmware. However, I had a bit of a hard time with the SRM loaded f/w (and this is the latest) when I had both an internal drive and 2 external tape drives. This problem went away when I went back to compiling in the f/w which then downloaded. Jason (bless his heart) Thorpe kept on claiming that NetBSD-alpha was completely broken without the f/w- I never saw such breakage at all and real active details were not provided, and in fact *you* (Wilko) are the only one who I know was completely blocked w/o the f/w. So, I'm in a bit of a quandary now as to what the right thing to do is. There is the open PR about putting the f/w into kld's- that'd probably be mostly the right thing to do. Before that happens, though, should the default be to have the f/w compiled in? It adds ~200K to kernel bloat (although this could be cut down by only compiling in 1040 f/w instead of including 1080, 2100 and 2200 f/w as well). Opinions? -matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-scsi" in the body of the message