On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 23:31:06 +0200 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday 04 April 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 12:22:35 -0700 > > "Willem Riede" <wrlk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On 4/4/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 16:26:14 +0200 Kern Sibbald <kern@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'm all in favor of deprecating ide-tape if ide-scsi is a viable alternative, > > > > > > > > ow. ide-scsi is in very bad shape and nobody is maintaining it or fixing > > > > bugs in it or anything. The only reason we retain ide-scsi at all is, err, > > I haven't heard about any major bugs besides well known module unload problem. > > What have I missed? oop, caught making unsubstantiatable assertions. I've seen an ongoing dribble of doesn't-work and it-crashes reports and I simply have not made any record of them, because it's ide-scsi and I don't expect there's anything we can do about them :( Often these reports are from people who are writing CDROMs and the usual response is "use cdrecord dev=/dev/hdc". I think Alan and Jens might have some thoughts on the ide-scsi status? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
