Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:55:55 -0500
From:      Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>
To:        bf1783@gmail.com
Cc:        Thomas Mueller <mueller6727@bellsouth.net>, mav@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: "options atapicam" and/or "device ATA_CAM" in kernel config?
Message-ID:  <44ehwt5r9g.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
In-Reply-To: <CAGFTUwM=f03PMVvL45-Ov965EqN-Lea_RtW1ksX94vbefn+Ypg@mail.gmail.com> (b. f.'s message of "Sun, 27 Nov 2011 08:52:06 +0000")
References:  <CAGFTUwM=f03PMVvL45-Ov965EqN-Lea_RtW1ksX94vbefn+Ypg@mail.gmail.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
"b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> writes:

>> > > What is the role of "options atapicam" and "device ATA_CAM" in kernel config file?
>>
>> > > Are they redundant?  Kernel will build with both these options, but will it make things go awry?  Is ATA_CAM deprecated?
>
> They are redundant and incompatible.  atapicam is deprecated, and
> ATA_CAM is the new default on FreeBSD 9 and 10. Unless you have some
> special requirements, you should use ATA_CAM on recent versions of
> FreeBSD, because it usually performs better than the old ATA code, and
> has added functionality.

Ah. My apologies to anyone I confused with my incorrect comments.

I must say that I'm thoroughly disappointed that my searches through the
official documentation didn't turn up anything related to this. Even the
Handbook, with extensive practical descriptions of how to use this
functionality, doesn't mention that its advice is irrelevant to anything
past 8.x.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44ehwt5r9g.fsf>