Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 16:31:37 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Duane Whitty <duane@greenmeadow.ca> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE Message-ID: <20060305213137.GA4276@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <200603051712.36483.duane@greenmeadow.ca> References: <200603041726.37525.duane@greenmeadow.ca> <20060304213050.GA57225@xor.obsecurity.org> <200603051712.36483.duane@greenmeadow.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:12:36PM -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30, Kris > Kennaway wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 05:26:37PM > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Just wondering if anyone has any > > > information/opinion as to why > > > device atapicam is not enabled by > > > default in the GENERIC kernel. > > > > It's not an appropriate default, > > since it modifies the way the ata > > subsystem works in ways the > > maintainer does not wish to support, > > Sorry, but do you mean the ata subsystem > maintainer or the atapicam maintainer? The former. > Is atapicam part of the base? Yes. > I was > under the impression it implements an > abstracted SCSI interface over the ata > device subsystem but maybe I'm not > adequately understanding what's really > happening. As the name suggests, it provides a CAM front-end to the devices, which is the same front-end used by the SCSI devices, so tools that expect to use CAM can work on the ATA devices too. > Just an observation but it seems as > though there is a great deal of use > being made of the atapicam subsystem. > I noticed for instance that in addition > to /dev/cd0 that /dev/pass0 > and /dev/da0 also did not show up until > I rebuilt with atapicam or did I just > miss them? The equivalent devices have different names under atapicam than ata, but why do you think they are necessary? > Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean that > usb drives and those types of devices > need the atapicam subsystem? I suspect you're wrong. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEC1i5Wry0BWjoQKURAn2kAJ9wMaisu5b80AvTkwA5rtKmIwlBkgCfQEYd Ik0ugzzmj2T+zqcS7Siq3ck= =MExv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060305213137.GA4276>