Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2017 08:55:18 -0800 (PST) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Deprecating / Removing floppy drive support Message-ID: <201712031655.vB3GtIME041023@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <43746890-e60a-5c8f-4c77-bbfe9a5a6aa9@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 12/03/17 07:16, Cy Schubert wrote: > > In message <CANCZdfrYdQTtjZJ_+jSVr25wjAZXd-+4atSaeT5ahfprbtXHWw@mail.gmail.c > > om> > > , Warner Losh writes: > >> --001a1144e7002bf7b0055f684ec8 > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > >> > >> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> bms@ has given me USB floppy formatting code which I'd planned to merge > >>> > >> into fdformat but considering the underlying devices are so very different > >>> it would be a difficult marriage. I'd be willing to support a ufdformat > >>> instead. > >> > >> > >> I'm keen on getting that into the tree. I have a ufd device and a need to > >> use it from time to time. If nothing else, I can be a reviewer of the code. > >> Is ufd working for you? > > > > It does work. My todo was to merge ufdformat into fdformat but as I said > > they are different enough that I need to work out how best to merge them. > > Having said that, now that there's discussion of removing fdc(4) maybe it's > > best to simply use ufdformat separately from fdformat that when we have the > > inclination to remove fdc(4), which may be very soon now -- it would be > > much less messy. I'm open to either option. > > > >> > >> > >>>> > >>>> Normally, I'd argue we might want to have a release where it's > >>> deprecated, > >>>> but it already was unusable in 11, and barely usable in 10 and has been a > >>>> shadow of its former self for much longer than that. > >>> > >>> The reason to keep some form of floppy support, eder fd or ufd is for the > >>> purpose of copying (dd) floppy media into image files for use with > >>> virtualbox or bhyve VMs. -- (One could say the same for CD and DVD drives. > >>> My new laptop at $JOB has no CD/DVD drive.) I digress. I think the ability > >>> to copy media to image files for VMs might be a reason to keep some form of > >>> support fd or ufd. > >> > >> > >> I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here... > > > > What I'm saying is that maintaining some form of fdc support whether it be > > in fdc(4) or a USB floppy the ability to dd floppy images for subsequent > > use in a VM would be desirable. I'm thinking of one example brought to my > > attention about a month ago where a person I know needed to copy old floppy > > disks to images on his hard drive in order to install an old sewing machine > > application in a virtualbox VM running Windows. > > > > Tangentially speaking, we could make the same case for CD and DVD drives > > not too many years from now... > > > > Personally, I don't care much (well maybe just a little) if fdc(4) itself > > is removed however I think we need some kind of support, which USB fd can > > supply if or when fdc(4) is removed. Maybe we should deprecate in 12 and > > remove in 13? > > > > > > Hi, > > I think as long as you can read and write USB floppy drives under > FreeBSD, this change is OK. Even though floppies are old-tech they are > still important: > > https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/05/25/2054255/us-military-uses-8-inch-floppy-disks-to-coordinate-nuclear-force-operations > > And from time to time we see criminal cases popping up with crazy people > using old C64's with floppy disks. I would feel bad if removing support > for floppies from FreeBSD would mean you would depend on a Windows > installation to read such disks. > > Further, keep this change two-step. First remove the code from GENERIC. > Then wait a year and see if anyone complains. Then delete the source code. > > --HPS I was gona keep quiet on this, but, well, I just cant now. If you remove the entry from GENERIC no one well complain, the more likely case is they well just compile a customer kernel and do there work. So using this as a "is anyone using it" is a straw man. That being said, even an old crusty fart like me only has had to deal with a 1.44 MB floppy in nearly a year, but I was very glad that I COULD deal with it using my prefered OS. Now I have lots of hardware around so it was not hard for me to find a TEAC 1.44 drive and hook it to my forensics motherboard and deal with the image, maybe it is good I am stuck on 5.4 with that system as it sounds like someone has broken yet another part of FreeBSD in the name of some progress. **RANT ON** Data point: OpenBSD still supports install from floppies.. so my guess is that OpenBSD has been able to keep this code running, it is a "Sad State of Affairs" that FreeBSD with 300+ developers can not manage the same. As Eitan pointed out, its only a 1000 lines so of code. Really now, we can manage to keep the mass of clang and zfs running, but we can not keep a 1000 line fdc.c running? I further know of someone who just told me they completed a converson of a stack of old 1.44MB floppies and 100MB zip disks to image files, and I am pretty sure that person is running 11.1 on a laptop, so this was probably done with the USB fd code, so I suppose we do have some form of support. It is possible that person netbooted an older desktop to do the work, as he does have those types of abilities. **DOUBLE RANT** Having been gone from the project for a long time and looking at it from the outside my observation is that FreeBSD is a lot of new toys that work fairly well and a collection of rotting bits that get the axe every few years. Each and everytime I have tried to move my collection of systems forward I have run into yet another thing that has simply been killed cause no one maintained it, broken cause someone added/changed something else and allowed it to sit and rot tell it was axed cause it was broken. If we, that is FreeBSD, continue on this path I can promise you our PR data base today well look like a mud puddle comparied to the ocean we shall create. Rather than spend time running around the tree finding rotting code to delete there needs to be a serious effort running around the tree FIXING the code that has rotted cause some new fangled thing borked it. ** END RANTS** -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201712031655.vB3GtIME041023>