Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 01 Jun 2003 14:20:28 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com>
To:        Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
Cc:        Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: raidframe
Message-ID:  <3EDA600C.90104@btc.adaptec.com>
In-Reply-To: <00b501c32876$74502fd0$812a40c1@PETEX31>
References:  <3ED9E8AB.5060106@he.iki.fi> <20030601232426.A43338@dilbert.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <00b501c32876$74502fd0$812a40c1@PETEX31>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Petri Helenius wrote:
>>RAIDframe is non-functional in 5.1 and -current [kern/50541] and it would be
>>unwise to use it in 5.0 for anything other than experimentation. Hopefully it
>>will be fixed before 5.2.
>>
> 
> Makes one wonder how broken code ever got into the tree in the first place...
> 
> Pete
> 

Just settle down a bit.

If you rewind to last October, RAIDFrame worked well.  Unfortunately,
some kernel interfaces changed in between now and then and RAIDFrame was
left behind.  I am remis in not fixing it, but please understand that I
also have quite a few other responsibilities, and I get paid $0 to work
on RAIDframe.

As for hardware raid, what cards have you tried, and what problems have
you experienced?  You last message was jsut a shot in the dark that few
of us would be able to help with.

Scott



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EDA600C.90104>