device atapicam not enabled in GENERIC kernel for FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE

David J Brooks daeg at houston.rr.com
Mon Mar 6 15:44:55 UTC 2006


On Sunday 05 March 2006 22:24, Duane Whitty wrote:
> On Sunday 05 March 2006 17:31, Kris
>
> Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 05:12:36PM
>
> -0400, Duane Whitty wrote:
> > > On Saturday 04 March 2006 17:30,
> > > Kris
> > >
> > > Kennaway wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at
> > > > 05:26:37PM
> > >
> > > -0400, Duane Whitty wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Just wondering if anyone has
> > > > > any information/opinion as to
> > > > > why device atapicam is not
> > > > > enabled by default in the
> > > > > GENERIC kernel.
> > > >
> > > > It's not an appropriate default,
> > > > since it modifies the way the ata
> > > > subsystem works in ways the
> > > > maintainer does not wish to
> > > > support,
> > >
> > > Sorry, but do you mean the ata
> > > subsystem maintainer or the
> > > atapicam maintainer?
> >
> > The former.
> >
> > > Is atapicam part of the base?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > >  I was
> > > under the impression it implements
> > > an abstracted SCSI interface over
> > > the ata device subsystem but maybe
> > > I'm not adequately understanding
> > > what's really happening.
> >
> > As the name suggests, it provides a
> > CAM front-end to the devices, which
> > is the same front-end used by the
> > SCSI devices, so tools that expect to
> > use CAM can work on the ATA devices
> > too.
>
> Ah, ok -- CAM -- common access method.
> I'm getting this
>
> > > Just an observation but it seems as
> > > though there is a great deal of use
> > > being made of the atapicam
> > > subsystem. I noticed for instance
> > > that in addition to /dev/cd0 that
> > > /dev/pass0 and /dev/da0 also did
> > > not show up until I rebuilt with
> > > atapicam or did I just miss them?
> >
> > The equivalent devices have different
> > names under atapicam than ata, but
> > why do you think they are necessary?
>
> because I misunderstood what umass
> needed and I inappropriately
> generalized on the basis of one port
> (k3b)
>
> > > Unless I'm wrong doesn't this mean
> > > that usb drives and those types of
> > > devices need the atapicam
> > > subsystem?
> >
> > I suspect you're wrong.
> >
> > Kris
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Kris.  Your suspicions were
> correct.  I was wrong.  I re-read the
> man pages for da, pass, and umass, and
> nowhere did it say I needed atapicam.
> So thanks for pointing me in the right
> direction.
>
> I rebooted with the GENERIC kernel,
> plugged in my usb memory device, and
> everything worked great.
>
> The k3b port required this and I suppose
> I generalized when I should not have.
>
> Again, much thanks.
>
> --Duane
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

This reminds me to ask: I have ATAPICAM enable in my kernal, specifically so 
that k3b can find my dvd+rw ... but no cd* devives appear in /dev, and k3b 
cannot find anything no matter where I tell it to look .. I must be 
overlooking something, but what?
 
-- 
Sure God created the world in only six days,
but He didn't have an established userbase.


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list