From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jan 2 01:00:51 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id BAA08121 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 01:00:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from hda.com (hda.com [199.232.40.182]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA08116 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 01:00:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dufault@localhost) by hda.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id EAA29529; Tue, 2 Jan 1996 04:15:18 -0500 From: Peter Dufault Message-Id: <199601020915.EAA29529@hda.com> Subject: Re: CD interface To: peterb@telerama.lm.com (Peter Berger) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 1996 04:15:17 -0500 (EST) Cc: dglo@SSEC.WISC.EDU, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Peter Berger" at Jan 1, 96 10:30:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > Note that the xmcd package -WILL NOT WORK ON 2.1 SYSTEMS- as distributed, > because of this. > > Why is scsi_ioctl.c returning EACCESS in this case? Is there a rationale > for it? It just seems like a check without a problem.... The rational is to prevent someone with read-ony access to the device from being able to do things like "allow removal" and "eject the disk". -- Peter Dufault Real Time Machine Control and Simulation HD Associates, Inc. Voice: 508 433 6936 dufault@hda.com Fax: 508 433 5267