From owner-freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 14 16:30:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13A116A423 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D1A43D45 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2EGUSsp085625 for ; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:28 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k2EGUSrR085624; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:28 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:28 GMT Message-Id: <200603141630.k2EGUSrR085624@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.org From: Mikhail Teterin Cc: Subject: Re: i386/75387: [ata] feature request: support of Promise SATAII150 TX4 wanted X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mikhail Teterin List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:30:29 -0000 The following reply was made to PR i386/75387; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mikhail Teterin To: =?iso-8859-1?q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= Cc: Mikhail Teterin , =?iso-8859-1?q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= , bug-followup@freebsd.org, sebastian.holmqvist@gmail.com, re@freebsd.org Subject: Re: i386/75387: [ata] feature request: support of Promise SATAII150 TX4 wanted Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 11:22:39 -0500 On Tuesday 14 March 2006 01:36 am, Søren Schmidt wrote: = Are you saying that the original code doesn't work but the patched one = does ? Except for the different names printed in the boot messages there = is no difference in how they are treated whatsower... Oops, no I am not, sorry. I just noticed a conflict when I updated my sys/dev/ata and proceeded to merge my earlier change into the new code. You are right, it would've worked anyway... Not sure about the card, that the originator of this PR has, though. Yours, -mi