From owner-cvs-all  Wed Sep 30 06:28:24 1998
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all>
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01018
          for cvs-all-outgoing; Wed, 30 Sep 1998 06:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-cvs-all)
Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id GAA01010;
          Wed, 30 Sep 1998 06:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net)
Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218])
	by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA15346;
	Wed, 30 Sep 1998 15:28:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from eivind@localhost)
	by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id PAA00444;
	Wed, 30 Sep 1998 15:28:02 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-ID: <19980930152802.28226@follo.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 15:28:02 +0200
From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_C=2E_Sm=F8rgrav_?= <dag-erli@ifi.uio.no>,
        Kenneth Merry <ken@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/cam/scsi scsi_all.c scsi_all.h
References: <199809292211.PAA22805@freefall.freebsd.org> <xzpk92lixie.fsf@grjottunagard.ifi.uio.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89.1i
In-Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=3Cxzpk92lixie=2Efsf=40grjottunagard=2Eifi=2Euio=2Eno=3E?=
 =?iso-8859-1?Q?=3B_from_Dag-Erling_C=2E_Sm=F8rgrav__on_Wed=2C_Sep_30=2C_?=
 =?iso-8859-1?Q?1998_at_02=3A40=3A57PM_+0200?=
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 30, 1998 at 02:40:57PM +0200, Dag-Erling C. Smørgrav  wrote:
> Kenneth Merry <ken@FreeBSD.ORG> writes:
> >   Log:
> >   In the bootverbose case, print out error messages for all errors that will
> >   not be retried again, even if the SF_NO_PRINT flag is set.
> 
> Could the bootverbose flag be made accessible through sysctl? This way
> you could boot verbose to get detailed probe messages, and switch it
> off later to avoid "unintersting" messages such as "tagged openings"
> etc. I'm willing to do the deed if somebody more clueful than me okays
> it and reviews the patch...

Sounds like a good thing.  Do It :-)

Eivind.