Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.mira.net.au!news.vbc.net!garlic.com!news.scruz.net!kithrup.com!news.Stanford.EDU!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk (Brian Somers) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: CDROM on IDE? Date: 16 Jul 1996 18:06:04 +0100 Organization: Coverform Ltd. Lines: 47 Message-ID: <4sgi5s$lr@anorak.coverform.lan> References: <4rjve9$ju2@netaxs.com> <31E048DE.446B9B3D@FreeBSD.org> <4s1m26$ard@netaxs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.coverform.lan X-NNTP-Posting-Host: awfulhak.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] A. Karl Heller (heller@cdnow.com) wrote: : Jordan K. Hubbard (jkh@FreeBSD.org) wrote: : : A. Karl Heller wrote: : : > : : > I want to move over to FreeBSD.. but I only have an IDE cdrom. : : > What version should I purchase on CDROM? I mean, I guess I don't : : > want to get 2.1 because it doesn't support it that well right? : : > So I should just buy the 2.2 SNAP shot? : : : : Wait for 2.1.5 if you want IDE CDROM suppose that's a little easier to : : use, though probably no more functional overall. : Great.. I just ordered the 2.1 release and the 2.2 snap.. I guess : I'll be seeing the 2.1.5 release soon eh? Ordering 2.1 so close to 2.1.5 is a bit unfortunate. However, the 2.2 SNAPs should support ATAPI. : : : : > And... why is the IDE / CDROM thing such a forgotten feature? : : : : Lack of volunteers to work on and improve it - it's that simple. Are : : you volunteering? :-) : heh..cute.. I'm too busy at my real job! =) But.. if I get the darn : thing installed.. I might play with it. : I just think it was kind of strange that FreeBSD is BUILT for the PC : and 90% of the ( I guess at the figure, please don't flame me ) PC's : out there are IDE based. I think your estimate is probably *very* wrong. Maybe 90% of PCs are IDE, but I would think that a far smaller percentage of PCs running FreeBSD (or any other unix) are IDE. If you're running DOS or Windows there is limited mileage in having SCSI. SCSI only really comes into its' own with *real* operating systems. : Then again, I know how easy it probably was to built the scsi driver. =) I suspect it was more difficult to write the SCSI driver than the IDE one (writing asyncronous stuff is always a bit tricky) but once it's written, it stays written. But with IDE, you've got the pleasure of re-writing bits for each new kind of device. -- Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....