Subject: Re: ataraid(4) vs. raidframe(4) (was: Re: ICH SMBus driver (from
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.org>
From: Juan RP <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/23/2007 20:27:38
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:23:55 -0500
"Jonathan A. Kollasch" <email@example.com> wrote:
> So, how is ataraid(4) better (or worse) than raidframe(4)?
Using ataraid(4) means that a ld(4) will be used as device, so that
you don't have to use raidframe because the software raid set up
in the firmware will be detected.
Juan Romero Pardines - The NetBSD Project
http://plog.xtrarom.org - NetBSD/pkgsrc news in Spanish