*BSD News Article 74167


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!comp.vuw.ac.nz!news.eds.co.nz!usenet
From: Marc Priebee <Marc.Priebee@nz.eds.com>
Subject: Re: CDROM on IDE?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: usenet@nz.eds.com (Usenet News Admin)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: EDS (New Zealand) Limited
Message-ID: <31EEF2B2.41C67EA6@nz.eds.com>
References: <4rjve9$ju2@netaxs.com> <31E048DE.446B9B3D@FreeBSD.org> <4s1m26$ard@netaxs.com> <4sgi5s$lr@anorak.coverform.lan>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.1.0-RELEASE i386)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: gypsy.comms.nz.eds.com
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 02:28:02 GMT
Lines: 60

Brian Somers wrote:
> 
> 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....
I've been running an IBM PS/Valuepoint 486-66 with a IDE CDROM under FreeBSD 2.1 for a
couple of months now, and have never had a problem. We even recently installed 2.1 ona
colleeges machine off the IDE CDROM. (Although his CDROM is the primary on a second IDE
controller, where-as mine is secondary on the first controller)


-- 

Marc Priebee                                       Ph.    64 4 474-5857
Systems Engineer (Communications)  Fax.   64 4 495-0473
EDS (New Zealand) Limited                Email. Marc.Priebee@nz.eds.com