![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, grundig@teleline.es wrote: > It's too "much effort"? Basically, what linux is asking is that cdrecord > stop wasting efforts trying to implement its own solution. Linux is > asking cdrecord to use SG_IO and leave device discovery and data transport > issues to the platform. > > Linux doesn't even need -scanbus for example. You could compile out that > code. Device discovery is done by the platform - I find _scary_ that other > "modern" operative systems don't have a way of providing device discovery > services in 2006 and that a external app is needed but hey, people is free > to design their operative system as they like. Linux provides it and leaves > Schilling time to focus in other things. In my book, that's not "too much > effort", is "less effort". If someone bugs you because SG_IO doesn't work > just tell him to report the problem here - in fact cdrecord already has a > "friendly" warning about "linux-2.5 and newer". The cdrecord low level > scsi driver for SG_IO should be much simpler than all the others... Well, you need to implement 30 (or so) platform-specific ways to get a list of devices, and portable applications aren't going to do that. To make it explicit: no way. It is a maintenance nightmare, 30 lowly-tested pieces of code, too. This sounds like a huge difference, but I don't believe it actually is. Jörg is trying to fight the system rather than stop complaining to users about their using /dev/hd*. The scanning code is there and can be made working with little effort probably. -- Matthias Andree - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-26 09:25 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||