aac support

Theo de Raadt deraadt at cvs.openbsd.org
Sat Mar 19 11:27:39 PST 2005

re: http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=10032&offset=15&rows=28

See a posting from Scott Long of FreeBSD;

Thanks for going to a public forum and saying I am full of crap.

I really appreciate that.  Boy, you sure do want to see all of
our projects do well, don't you.

Apparently you have zero idea of where we are going.

While you are content with shipping binary stuff in your source tree
and in your ports tree, we are not.  We do not ship binaries.  We are
not interested in shipping a binary for some CLI.  We actually do have
the Linux CLI working in emulation, but we will not supply it to our
user community.  I have cancelled that effort by that developer.  We
will not supply something to our user community that they cannot fix
and improve themselves.

We have been talking with Adaptec for 4 months.  They have not
given us management information.

We have been talking to Adaptec for more than a year to get other RAID
controller information, as in, how to even get the mailbox stuff
fixed.  They have not given that to us, either.

Noone thought to talk to you.  You are, I am sure, under a
non-disclosure agreement with Adaptec, and I am sure you would
therefore not give us documentation.  We are quite used to FreeBSD and
Linux people signing NDA's by now.  Yesterday on the phone Doug said
"But we did give OpenBSD documentation, we gave them to Scott Long".

Thus, Doug mentioned that *you* had documentation, and thought that
was enough.  Of course it is not.  You do not help us, I told him.
That is not how it works.  And so it stands -- we still have no

Did I get an offer from you for documentation before you went onto a
public site and said I was full of crap?  No, I did not.

And I expect that now that you have said I am full of crap, we still
will get no documentation from you.  Right?

We are working on a driver-independent raid management framework.  One
command (perhaps called raidctl(4), we don't know) that should work on
any controller from any vendor, which would do management, because the
management stuff would be abstracted in a driver-independent way into
each driver.  Yes this is a difficult project.  We have support for
AMI almost working.  We will support some other product, as well, then
we'll see where Adaptec stands.

I do a lot of work on OpenBSD.  I am sure that you do a lot of work on
your stuff in FreeBSD too, so you know what it is to be a very busy
busy person.

When a vendor ignores me and the efforts of 4 other people trying to
get the vendor to listen -- for that long, we have no choice.

Yet, you, Scott, you think that you are therefore able to slag us and
call us wrong, because YOU are in the loop and we are not?  Because
you used to WORK at Adaptec, and we did not?  That somehow makes us
full of crap?

I have been watching the mail going to Doug over the last 24 hours.

I have been counting controllers mentioned in mails and am now up to
over 1,800 Adaptec RAID controllers, with people from very large
commercial operations complaining that they have been switching to
other controllers (or, having now seen Adaptec's failure in this
regard, that they will now actively not buy Adaptec again).

Those controllers will not be supported in OpenBSD 3.7 in May.  If
Adaptec wishes them to be supported in a future release, they had
better come and make amends.  We are sick of supporting the hardware
of vendors who shit on their customers via us.  Maybe they can repair
this horrid situation enough that we will once again support their
controllers by the time OpenBSD 3.8 ships in November.

Quite frankly, you don't understand what we are trying to do, and
Scott, this is just like the binary only Atheros driver that FreeBSD

I like it when all hardware is supported with source code, but just
because our methods for getting there are different than yours, Scott,
that gives you absolutely no right to go posting such a thing as you
did there.

Shame on you.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list