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