Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 11 Dec 1999 11:41:22 +0100
From:      Dieter Rothacker <didi@Xterminator.STUDFB.UniBw-Muenchen.de>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: HEADSUP: wd driver will be retired! 
Message-ID:  <jClSOIKUnyW42bmsIpvU0c8zbK91@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <19991211102842.C18331CA0@overcee.netplex.com.au>
References:  <didi@Xterminator.STUDFB.UniBw-Muenchen.de>  of "Sat, 11 Dec 1999 11:10:20 %2B0100." <pyJSOKMPdliWfW9ot2La2KkdmCqv@4ax.com> <19991211102842.C18331CA0@overcee.netplex.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999 18:28:42 +0800, Peter Wemm wrote:

>Dieter Rothacker wrote:
>> 
>> You should use the kernel option
>> "options	ATA_STATIC_ID"
>> for such cases. At least it works for me :-)
>
>I think this should only apply to the /dev/wd* compatability devices.  ie:
>use the correct numbering for new installs onto ad*, but still support the old
>spread-out naming for wd*.  This used to be more important as it required
>fiddling with $root_disk_unit, but the new mountroot code has relieved the
>pressure there.

Why would you want to define "correct" numbering the non-spread-out
numbering? Or did I misunderstand you?
I have all my disks as master drives on the channels. Now, when I hook up
another disk for backup or maintenance purposes, my numbering is messed up.
With spread-out numbering I do not have to worry about anything... sounds
more "correct" to me.
-- 
Dieter Rothacker


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?jClSOIKUnyW42bmsIpvU0c8zbK91>