Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 08:48:26 -0700 From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> To: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] changes to cam_get_device() and cam_open_device() Message-ID: <4CAF3D4A.70001@feral.com> In-Reply-To: <4CAF3C6D.3020003@freebsd.org> References: <4BCDEBF6.3030609@icyb.net.ua> <4CA30B24.8040707@freebsd.org> <4CAEDF48.1030602@freebsd.org> <201010081221.24584.bruce@cran.org.uk> <4CAF31EE.6060409@freebsd.org> <4CAF3C6D.3020003@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The 'eject on close' variant is a hangover from older stuff. I don't think it is much used. I believe packages like bacula and amanda just use mtio ioctls directly on the no-rewind device (haven't worked on tape in a long time, so my recollection is quite stale).
I think as long as no-rewind cases are covered, whatever you do that simplifies things will be a good thing.
> Removing special support for them in cam_get_device() and cam_open_device() might
> still be a good idea. Not sure.
> I say this because sa(4) also has eject-on-close variation ("/dev/esaN"), but
> there is no special support for those.
>
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CAF3D4A.70001>