Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:17:34 +0100 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cdcontrol via atapicam in 4.8-RC Message-ID: <200303111117.40339.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20030310044541.10713.qmail@pikachu.bsp.bc.niigata-u.ac.jp> References: <20030306124454.5330.qmail@pikachu.bsp.bc.niigata-u.ac.jp> <20030309073546.A19190@panzer.kdm.org> <20030310044541.10713.qmail@pikachu.bsp.bc.niigata-u.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Boundary-02=_Efbb+XVl2eEhQQB Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 10 March 2003 05:45, Mamoru Iwaki wrote: > Hopefully, it would be fixed in 4.8-RELEASE because enabling both > atapicam and atapi?? looks dangerous; i.e. it is hard to guarantee > mutually exclusive access to the device, and there is no description > in case that the device is accessed via both ways simultaneously. It's not so bad, I've run FreeBSD with both enabled even before atapicam wa= s=20 merged into the tree and didn't have problems - it's not so easy to manage= =20 and create a situation where two applications try accessing the two devices= =20 at the same time after all. =2D-=20 Regards, Michael Nottebrock --Boundary-02=_Efbb+XVl2eEhQQB Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA+bbfEXhc68WspdLARApPvAKCo3e9fjUpoqsFK/sJAt77Re3+suACfTJnq v6gbdWW2FZFOyYzYK1Zhxlk= =RKew -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_Efbb+XVl2eEhQQB-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200303111117.40339.michaelnottebrock>